Hello, I'm Mr. Marchant, and thank you for joining me for today's history lesson.

My job today is to help guide you through our history resources in the lesson.

And I'm gonna be working to make sure that by the end of our time together, you can securely meet our lesson objective.

Welcome to today's lesson, which is part of our unit on the development of the Cold War.

But we've been asking ourselves, "How did the Cold War develop in Asia?" By the end of today's lesson, you'll be able to explain the significance of the Korean War.

There are four key words which will help us navigate our way through today's lesson.

Those are our armistice, 38th parallel, strategy, and proxy war.

And armistice is an agreement to stop fighting that is made between two countries.

The 38th parallel was the pre-war border between North Korea and South Korea.

A strategy is a plan that you used to achieve something, and a proxy war is a conflict where some groups fight on behalf of a larger country which does not participate directly itself.

Today's lesson will be split into three parts and will begin by focusing on ending the Korean War.

The Korean War began in June, 1950.

The war quickly escalated its scale.

An American-led UN force joined the war to defend South Korea, and then China joined the war in October, 1950 as UN forces approached its border with North Korea.

By mid 1951, the Korean War had reached a stalemate.

Both the communist forces of China and North Korea and the American-led UN armies struggled to gain an advantage over one another.

For the next two years, the frontier between the two sides remained just north at the 38th parallel, the pre-war border.

So thinking about what we've just heard, which statement is most accurate? That American-led forces held the advantage in the Korean War from 1951 to 1953? That communist forces held the advantage in the Korean War from 1951 to 53, or that neither side held an advantage in the Korean War from 1951 to 1953.

Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was C.

The Korean War entered a stalemate in mid 1951, meaning that neither side held an advantage for 1951 until the war finally ended in 1953.

Despite the stalemate, the Korean War proved extremely costly.

Millions of soldiers were involved in the fighting.

The US spent $30 billion on the war, and roughly 40% of all money spent by the Chinese government from 1950 to 1953 went towards funding their war efforts.

And the war also led to extremely high death tolls for all the major participants.

The US Army experienced over 30,000 deaths in battle during the war.

South Korea and China both experienced over 100,000 deaths in battle each during the war.

And North Korean forces suffered over 200,000 deaths in battle during the war.

So let's make sure we have a secure understanding of what we've just heard.

We have a statement on the screen that says, "Only communist forces suffered high death tolls during the Korean War." Is that statement true or false? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that that statement was false, but we need to be able to justify our response.

So two justifications have appeared on the screen.

The first says that "The death toll for American soldiers and their allies were much higher than those of communist forces." And the second says, "That all major participants in the Korean War suffered from high death tolls." So which justification is correct? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct justification was B.

All major participants in the Korean War suffered from high death tolls.

The US suffered over 30,000 deaths in battle, both South Korea and China experienced over 100,000 deaths in battle, and the North Korean army suffered over 200,000 deaths in battle during the war.

In July, 1953, an armistice was signed to bring an end to fighting in the Korean War.

The armistice left Korea divided.

Despite three years of fighting, the border between North and South Korea only adjusted slightly.

So thinking about what we've just heard, I want you to write the missing word from the following sentence.

"In 1953 an blank was signed leading to the end of the Korean War." So what's the missing word? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the missing word was armistice.

In 1953, an armistice was signed leading to the end of the Korean War.

So, we are now in a good position for all of our knowledge about ending the Korean War into practise.

We have views from Lucas and Laura who disagree with one another.

Lucas says that "Communist successes forced the UN forces to sign an armistice," whereas Laura says, "The armistice showed that both sides were struggling in a war." Whose view is more accurate, Lucas' or Laura's? You should justify your answer.

So pause video here, and press play when you're ready to reflect on your response.

Okay, well done for all of your hard work on that task.

So I asked you, whose view was more accurate, Lucas' or Laura's? And your answer may have included, "Laura's view is more accurate than Lucas'.

An armistice was signed in July, 1953 to bring an end to fighting during the Korean War and was agreed to largely because the war had become a costly stalemate.

For example, by 1953, over 30,000 American soldiers and more than 100,000 Chinese troops had died in battle." So really well done if your own response looked something like that model, which we'd just seen.

And now we're ready to move on to the second part of our lesson for today.

But we are going to think about the significance of the Korean War for the USA.

The Korean War was significant for influencing the USA's approach to the Cold War.

The conflict influenced the overall strategy of the US for responding to the spread of communism.

The Korean War was important for strengthening the USA's commitment to a strategy of containment to resist the spread of communism.

The USA had followed policies aimed at preventing communism from spreading to new countries since 1946.

For instance, the American intervention in Korea was intended to defend South Korea, and contain the threat posed by communist North Korea.

However, during the Korean War, pressure had grown for the USA to pursue a more aggressive strategy.

Journalists, Republican politicians, and General Douglas MacArthur, the American Commander of UN forces in Korea, all argued that President Truman should authorise a roll back strategy.

roll back meant more than just defending non-communist states.

It argued that the USA should try to remove communist control in countries where they had already gained power.

The USA attempted a roll back strategy once UN forces crossed the 38th parallel, and invaded North Korea in September, 1950.

Whilst this invasion was initially very successful, it also triggered China's entry into the Korean War, which turned the conflict into a bloody stalemate.

Consequently, amongst most American leaders, the idea of roll back as an American strategy for the Cold War was discredited.

It only seemed to risk escalating conflicts and might even risk war between the US and the USSR.

Indeed, even when a Republican, Dwight D Eisenhower became US President in 1953, roll back was not pursued.

Eisenhower, instead, accepted an armistice agreement in Korea which contained communism to North Korea rather than rolling it back entirely.

So let's make sure we have a secure understanding of everything we've just heard about the significance of the Korean War for the USA.

"Which strategy had the US followed since 1946 to manage the spread of communism?" Was it containment, massive retaliation or roll back? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was A, containment.

This strategy aimed at preventing communism spreading to other countries which were not communist.

And let's try another question.

"Which strategy argued that the US should try to remove communists in countries where they already had power?" Was it containment, massive retaliation or roll back? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct answer was C.

Roll back was a strategy which argued that the US should try to remove communists in countries where they had already taken power, and this was attempted in North Korea during the Korean War.

And let's try one further question.

This time we have a statement which says, "The roll back strategy escalated the war in Korea." Is that statement true or false? Pause the video here and press play, when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that that statement was true, but we need to be able to justify our response.

So two justifications have appeared on the screen.

The first says, "That crossing the 38th parallel into North Korea helped to trigger China's entry into the war." And the second says, "That crossing the 38th parallel into North Korea helped to trigger Soviet nuclear strikes." So which one of those two justifications is correct? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct justification was A, "Crossing the 38th parallel into North Korea as part of a new roll back strategy helped to trigger China's entry into the war." And let's try one final question.

"How did the 1953 armistice represent an American acceptance of containment rather than roll back?" Pause video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said, "Non-communist South Korea was defended, but the US agreed to communist rule continuing in North Korea." Clearly showing that they were no longer trying to roll back communism where it already existed.

So we're now in a good position to put all of our knowledge about the significance of the Korean War for the USA into practise.

I want you to study the two statements shown on the screen.

The first says, "That the Korean War encouraged the USA to follow a roll back strategy to manage to spread a communism." And the second says, "That the Korean War encouraged the USA to follow a containment strategy to manage the spread of communism." So which statement is correct? You need to explain your answer.

Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your response.

Okay, well done for all of your effort on that task.

So I asked you, "Which statement was correct?", and for you to explain your answer.

Your answer may have included, "The Korean War encouraged the US to follow a containment strategy to manage the spread of communism.

During the war, the US did attempt a roll back strategy as UN forces crossed the 38th parallel and invaded North Korea.

However, this strategy had proved problematic because it triggered China's entry into the war, which escalated the conflict, and eventually turned it into a stalemate.

Therefore, to end the war, the US returned to a containment strategy rather than continuing to try and roll back North Korean communism: the 1953 armistice maintained South Korean independence, but also left communist rule in North Korea in tact." So well done if your own response looked something like that model, which we just seen.

And now we're ready for the third and final part of our lesson for today where we're going to think about the significance of the Korean War for the superpowers and China.

The Korean War was significant for both of the superpowers even though the USSR did not fight in it directly.

The war demonstrated how the USA and USSR could challenge one another whilst reducing the risk of direct conflict.

The war also affected both superpower's relationship with China and therefore.

the balance of power in Asia between the two.

The Korean War was the first proxy war of the Cold War.

Although the Soviet Union had avoided formal and direct participation in the conflict, it had provided considerable support to the communist armies fighting in it.

For instance, many of the tanks used by the North Korean army to invade the south in 1950 had been provided by the USSR.

Meanwhile, China was provided with billions of dollars worth of aid from the Soviet Union to help it maintain its own war effort.

In this way, the Soviets were able to challenge US power without the risk of becoming involved in a direct conflict which could escalate to nuclear warfare between the two superpowers.

Similarly, President Truman limited the war to Korea rather than attacking China as some officials advised him to in order to avoid transforming the war into a direct conflict between the US and USSR.

Proxy wars and limited war strategies became a common feature of superpower rivalry over the remainder of the Cold War.

So thinking about what we've just heard, I want you to change one word to correct the following statement.

"The Korean War was a proxy war between the USA and China." So consider which word appears to be incorrect, and what should it be changed to? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the incorrect word was China, and that it should have been changed to USSR.

The Korean War was a proxy war between the USA and the USSR.

And let's try another question.

This time we have a statement which reads, "The USA and USSR both tried to avoid direct conflict between themselves." Is that statement true or false? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that that statement was true, but we need to be able to justify our response.

So two justifications have appeared on the screen.

The first says, "That the superpowers signed a treaty agreeing that they would not go to war over issues in Korea." And the second says, "That the USA ruled out nuclear attacks against China, and the USSR limited the assistance it provided to China at times." So, which one of those two justifications is correct? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to see the right answer.

Okay, well done to everybody who said that the correct justification was B.

We can tell that both superpowers tried to avoid direct conflict between themselves as the USA ruled out nuclear attacks against China during the war, and the USSR limited the assistance it provided to China at times.

The Korean War had a significant impact on the relationship between both of the superpowers and China.

American and Chinese relations were already poor before the war.

The US government refused to recognise China's communist government led by Mao Zedong.

The experience of fighting against one another during the Korean War destroyed the small prospect that the US government might choose to recognise and develop good relations with China.

Furthermore, US troops remained stationed in South Korea even after the armistice of 1953 was signed, which both irritated and concerned the Chinese government in the years after peace had been restored.

The worsening of relations between China and the USA helped to strengthen the Soviet union's position in Asia during the Cold War.

These tensions made it important for Chinese leaders like Mao to maintain good relations with the Soviet Union, just in case the Americans decided to attack in the future.

Therefore, the Soviets found it easy to maintain net influence in Asia.

However, the Korean War also helped to raise tensions in the alliance which had been established between the USSR and China in 1950.

Chinese troops entered the Korean War under the expectation that they would receive considerable Soviet support.

But Joseph Stalin limited this assistance to avoid the USSR being drawn into direct conflict with the USA.

The Soviets even continued to charge the Chinese full price for weapons and equipment sold to them during the war.

These actions led to Chinese resentment of the Soviet Union and indicated that shared belief in communism might not be enough to maintain close relations between the two countries.

So thinking about what we've just heard, how did the Korean War strengthen Soviet influence in China and Asia? Pause video here and press play when you're ready to check your answer.

Okay, well done to anybody who said, "China felt the need to remain close to the USSR, just in case it was attacked by the USA," and this helped to emphasise the influence of the USSAR in Asia.

And so now we're ready to put all of our knowledge about the significance of the Korean War for the superpowers in China into practise.

I want you to explain one reason why the Korean War was important for superpower relations.

You may consider the comparative strength of each superpower or the methods used to rival one another.

So pause video here and press play when you're ready to reflect on your response.

Okay, well done for all of your effort on that task.

So I asked you to explain one reason why the Korean War was important for superpower relations, and your answer may have included, "One reason why the Korean War was important for superpower relations was because it helped to strengthen the USSR's position in Asia.

Asia was one of many areas where the two superpowers competed for influence and power.

However, as a result of the Korean War, tensions between the USA and China were heightened, and a continued presence of US troops in South Korea after the war ensured relations remained poor.

This helped the Soviets as it ensured that China, one of the most important powers in the region, felt the need to remain close to the USSR to ensure it would be protected in case the Americans decided to attack." So well done if your own response looks something like that model.

Alternatively, your answer could have included, "One reason why the Korean War was important for superpower relations was because it was the first major proxy war during the war.

The US and USSR supported different sides and hoped to reduce the influence of the other by achieving military success in Korea.

The Soviets provided weapons, equipment, and advice to communist armies which invaded South Korea, whilst the US sent its own armies to resist these attacks.

Nevertheless, both sides also tried to avoid direct combat between the two superpowers.

This type of behaviour fighting one another through proxy wars would become more common during the rest of the Cold War." So again, really well done if your own response looks something like that model there.

And so now we've reached the end of today's lesson, which puts us in a good position to summarise our learning about the consequences of the Korean War.

We've seen that the Korean War ended when an armistice was signed in July, 1953.

The problems caused by the decision to cross the 38th parallel convinced US leaders to support containment strategies rather than attempting to roll back communism.

The Korean War was the first of many proxy wars between the superpowers during the Cold War, which allowed them to compete for influence without fighting directly against one another.

And the Korean War strengthened Soviet influence over China due to increased tensions between the US and Chinese governments.

So really well done for all of your hard work during today's lesson.

It's been a pleasure to help guide you for our resources, and I look forward to seeing you again in the future as we think further about the development of the Cold War and continue to ask ourselves, "How did the Cold War develop in Asia?".