The essay question is: "To what extent did the growth of Pacific tensions lead to the bombing of Pearl Harbour?"
It's a 25 mark question that we get 45 minutes to write. This is my introduction, am I on the right track?
The growth of Pacific tensions was of fundamental importance in leading to the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbour in 1941. The nature of nationalism and the responses to imperialism had an extensive role in contributing to the escalation of Pacific tensions. These, when compounded with other factors such as, US and British policies, the role of imperialism and militarism, and the breakdown of political negotiations, were imperative to creating the situation whereby Japan was faced with two options: to succumb to U.S. and British demands or to risk war by expanding into South-East Asia for resources. Thus as a result of Japan’s situation in 1941 caused by Pacific tensions, Pearl Harbour was “born of strategic desperation”.
Thanks!
Well, for starters, you really should spell it "Harbor," since it's an American proper name. Proper nouns do not do the Commonwealth/US English flip-flops in translation between the two, but keep their original spelling. Also,
Breakdown of political negotiations
Between who? Japan and the US? The US and Britain? The Allies and Axis? Different political organizations in Japan itself? You can be specific here without giving away too much information.
Other than that, I don't think it's a bad thesis. Just clean up the grammar errors and streamline it a little, and you should be okay.
Best advice I can give - NO WRITING IN THE PASSIVE VOICE!
IDENTIFY WHO you are referring to. Instead of just implying "stuff happened" or some abstract "thing" just "occurred."
This is not just about CLARITY. But also demonstrates deep knowledge. By using passive voice, you can skip around the edges of key actors involved, keep everything murky and unclear. By using the active voice, and forcing yourself to identify WHO is doing WHAT to WHOM, you demonstrate not only what happened but WHO is doing it.
It's really hard to gauge because it's vague. "nature of nationalism" and "responses to imperialism"? "Role of imperialism and militarism"? I mean, sure, it sounds right, but there's not much to comment on unless we know specifics like the other commenter pointed out.
Just to be sure- if this is a timed essay response, is it legal/ethical for you to ask a forum for advice?
Good luck in your history exam!