Britain and the Yishuv: Infrastructural Development in Palestine, 1939–1945

Economic and infrastructural development, especially during WWII, proved a necessary precondition for Israel’s viability.

Michael Brodsky
Jul 24, 2017 · 7 min read

The Jewish community of Palestine was in many ways unique. Though governed by a Mandate since 1922, the Yishuv had managed, unlike most of its neighbors, to autonomously develop civil institutions. While stewardship gave to Britain authority over decision-making, the League of Nations had intended to prepare the land of Palestine for eventual independence. And this now realistic objective, coupled with growing sympathy for the establishment of a National Home, gave the Jewish community long sought hope. It was a dream made possible during the interwar years and ardently pursued by the whole of Jewish Palestine.

The Jewish Agency for Palestine, officially established in 1929, had been created “for the purpose of advising and cooperating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social, and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish National Home.”[1] The Agency’s purview dealt predominantly with external political negotiation, though it extended also to immigration, agriculture, and economic development. It took an important step forward when, following the 1929 Palestine riots, Jewish political leaders began consolidating authority over the community’s mainstream militia. The Haganah, as this group was known in Hebrew, had been formed in June 1920 to protect Jewish farms from the threat of violence. It was built upon the foundations of a previous defense force and consistently strengthened throughout the subsequent two decades.

While the Agency served Palestine as a primary means of political organization, there emerged a number of other supplementary institutions. The two most significant were the Jewish National Council, or Va’ad Le’umi, and the General Federation of Jewish Labor, called Histadrut. Established in 1920, the Va’ad Le’umi spoke exclusively on behalf of local Palestinian Jewry. It did not, unlike the Jewish Agency, represent the broader interests of worldwide Zionism. The Council was divvied into ministerial departments and facilitated the creation of public healthcare, education, and other welfare services. Histadrut, meanwhile, also coalesced in 1920 when a number of small labor organizations decided to consolidate. Though in principle an organization dedicated to the advancement of labor, Histadrut quickly evolved into much more than a trade union. Indeed, a 1937 memorandum to the Palestine Royal Commission reads:

The functions of the Histadruth are not merely those of a Federation of Trade Unions whose main task is the improvement of labour conditions of its members. It is the aim of this organization not only to organize the worker, but, as it were, to create the Jewish worker, train him and settle him on the land; not only to improve the existing labour conditions, but to multiply labour possibilities and extend centres of absorption; not only to defend the interest of Labour in the general economy, but to build its own enterprises, especially in the field of agriculture; not only to make the worker a collaborator in the building of cultural and spiritual values, but to create a new literature of science and art. The Histadruth is — in aspiration and essence — an organization binding together the founders of a National Home, the builders of a country, the liberators of a people.[2]

These aforementioned institutions were democratic in nature and administered, in large part, by European-educated immigrants. They were advanced in political integration, organizational structure, and operational stability. Communal involvement, too, expanded very rapidly. Whereas Histadrut’s initial membership numbered only 4,433 persons, it grew, by 1945, in excess of 140,500. But just as critical as institutional development was the underlying motivation of Jewish constituents: namely, the realization of a National Home in Palestine.

Jewish subjects and citizens from across the world had, since the First Aliyah in 1882, uprooted themselves from established communities to further advance this dream. Financially successful and urbanized Jews chose, of their own accord, to settle uncultivated Palestinian land and — in tandem with Palestine’s longstanding Jewish community — pursue a comprehensive program of redevelopment. “Along with the progress of Arab agriculture has come a new Jewish agriculture,” wrote American officials in 1946, “without parallel in the Middle East and, in some respects, without parallel anywhere in the world. In Palestine an urban Western population has deliberately transformed itself into an agricultural peasantry, in the design of creating a healthy foundation for a Jewish National Home.”[3] They thereby joined a community of roughly one million Palestinian Arabs, many of whom opposed these nationalistic ambitions. The Yishuv thus developed independent organizations and tended to keep, both communally and politically, separate from its Arab neighbors.

By 1939 this community numbered nearly 450,000. Political organization was well underway and civil structures already far advanced. A defensive militia, governed by civilians, had likewise been established. And, just as importantly, economic enterprise had created strong foundations upon which to further expand. The Yishuv was thus, in September 1939, ripe for maturation. But rather than foment a process of new development, the onset of the Second World War critically advanced one already underway.

It is within the aforementioned context that this dissertation finds its niche. When war broke out in 1939, the Jewish community in Palestine — for all its achievements — would not have been able to sustain itself as a sovereign country. When the Yishuv declared independence in 1948, however, this no longer proved the case. What then changed during the Second World War? In what ways did the Yishuv, as a product of Britain’s military effort, evolve into a viably autonomous country? Though much has been written on aspects of this question, the scope of existing research is surprisingly limited. In fact it tends to focus, more or less exclusively, on relevant political developments and the path toward ultimate partition. The White Paper of 1939, illegal immigration, and ramifications of the Biltmore Program have all been admirably considered. Still other accounts, though fewer and farther between, have examined the Haganah and its important evolution — in cooperation with British forces — during the uncertain years of the Second World War.

There seems a critical aspect of our understanding, however, which remains under-explored. Though political and military progress has already been documented, comparatively little has been published on the development of Palestine’s infrastructure during these crucial years. In what ways, if at all, was the Yishuv’s physical and institutional framework advanced by the onset of war? Though relevant sources speak to both Arab and Jewish communities, this thesis will exclusively address the latter.

Ashley Jackson lays an important foundation by exploring Palestine’s geo-strategic relevance. Jacob Metzer and Roger Owen, in examining wartime economics, consider British influence on the country’s development. David De Vries takes their work a step further by detailing the war’s effect on capital privatization and entrepreneurship. He convincingly argues that Britain helped develop Palestine’s nascent diamond industry, which in turn helped solidify the country’s penchant for capitalism. While the argument is important and very well taken, it hardly makes reference to institutional development. Dan Horowitz and Moshe Lissak take a different approach by emphasizing wartime influence on both national institutions and political organizations. Shmuel Dothan, meanwhile, in A Land in the Balance: The Struggle for Palestine, 1918–1948, explores institutional and economic development in very considerable detail. While aspects of these questions have thus been touched upon (and all parties recognize wartime influence), they are usually addressed tangentially and without greater context. The extent to which answers have been formulated, moreover, is typically cursory at best. No comprehensive attempt to understand this issue has yet been endeavored, and that is the historiographical void that this thesis attempts to fill.

Many sources were consulted in exploring these issues. While a few select memoirs proved immensely helpful, primary research revolved largely around pamphlets, books, and official publications. Histadrut and its subsidiaries wrote often on their work, and the Jewish Agency for Palestine — particularly its Information Department and Economic Research Institute — made frequent use of printing presses. Their published material lends important perspective, both firsthand and detailed, on the Yishuv and its many societal institutions. It is important to recognize, however, their inherent bias toward exaggerating Palestine’s importance. Archival sources are helpful in balancing this partiality. Documents from the Royal Institute of International Affairs and The National Archives at Kew, London, shed important light on British policy and its infrastructural impact on Mandatory Palestine. While certainly placing emphasis on Britain’s helpfulness, Colonial Office, Foreign Office, and War Office files — among others — are usually even-handed and scrupulously objective. These aforementioned sources, taken in sum, thus lend a factual and holistic understanding of the relevant historical actors and issues.

Part I investigates the growth of construction and Jewish institutional experience. Palestine greatly benefitted, throughout the course of the war, from Britain’s expanded military presence. Both the Desert War and subsequent Middle Eastern campaigns guaranteed Palestine’s strategic value. Military bases were extensively constructed and arms depots scattered throughout the country. Roads, police stations, and airfields quickly followed. Not only was physical infrastructure thereby expanded, but Jewish firms like Solel Boneh gained much of the building experience. As construction thus flourished and institutional management improved, the manufacture of local materiel — such as concrete, glass, and machinery — was greatly cultivated as well.

Part II transitions to the origins of industrial Palestine and the obstacles faced by a once dominant citrus trade. The subsequent growth of manufacturing, especially in the machinery, textile, and chemical industries, will then be examined at length. While momentum was initially gained by military contracts, Palestine’s British Administration — in coordination with local Jewish leadership — successfully transitioned factories to the manufacture of consumer goods. All the while, production of foodstuffs was greatly developed and agricultural output much advanced. The role of British economic organizations, such as the United Kingdom Commercial Corporation and Middle East Supply Centre, will likewise be considered.

Immense economic and infrastructural development proved a necessary precondition for the viability of a Jewish state. This thesis explores the growth, during the Second World War, which thereby occurred. It argues that Britain’s wartime presence in Palestine facilitated crucial infrastructural progress without which Israel would have struggled to survive. The following pages examine all relevant issues and attempt, as well as possible, to underscore their lasting significance.


The above is an excerpted Introduction from a masters dissertation, submitted to the London School of Economics Department of International History. To read the rest of this dissertation, please visit this link.

Footnotes:

[1] Dan Horowitz and Moshe Lissak, Origins of the Israeli Polity: Palestine Under the Mandate, Chicago 1978, pp. 45.

[2] Histadruth, Histadruth Facts and Figures: Submitted to the Delegates of the World Trade Union Conference, London 1945, pp. 1.

[3] Robert Nathan, Oscar Gass, and Daniel Creamer, Palestine: Problem and Promise, Washington, D.C. 1946, pp. 218.

Michael Brodsky

Written by

Michigan born, San Francisco based. Head of Campaigns at Countable. Interested in civic tech, Israeli affairs, and lowering barriers to political entry.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade