Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: blockade should be explained before judging consequences. is the best answer. It fits Part three: Ending the war within BA Conflict and tension: the First World War, 1894-1918 and directly supports Study Germany's surrender, including the blockade, Kaiser's abdication, armistice and the contributions of Haig and Foch to Germany's defeat. Check this by using evidence, provenance, date, event, individual, policy, consequence; do not choose a distractor simply because it sounds historical.

The correct option is blockade should be explained before judging. This MCQ is about Which option separates cause and consequence, not just general recall. The correct option works because it matches the period context of Paper 1 Section B: Wider world depth studies and uses the same evidence base as Study Germany's surrender, including the blockade, Kaiser's abdication, armistice and the contributions of Haig and Foch to Germany's defeat. The rejected options are weaker: 1) A source comment with no provenance.; 2) A long-term cause treated as a result.; 3) A similarity presented as a difference.. To decide between them, students should identify, support, test, reject the option against chronology, evidence and the learning objective, then keep evidence separate from opinion and interpretation.