Editing Zionism (section)

=== British Mandate and development of the Zionist quasi-state ===
After the war, the plan for a greater Arab kingdom under the Hashemite family was abandoned when King Feisal was expelled from Damascus by the French in 1920. In parallel, the Zionist demand for a clear British acknowledgment of the entirety of Palestine as the Jewish national home was rejected. Instead, Britain committed only to establishing a Jewish national home "in Palestine" and promised to facilitate this without prejudicing the rights of existing "non-Jewish communities"{{Em dash}}these qualifying statements aroused the concern of Zionist leaders at the time.{{sfn|Gorny|1987|loc=Historical Background}}

The British mandate over Palestine, established in 1922, was based on the Balfour declaration, explicitly privileging the Jewish minority over the Arab majority.{{sfn|Khalidi|2020|loc=Chapter 1}} In addition to declaring British support for the establishment of a "Jewish national home" in Palestine, the mandate included provisions facilitating Jewish immigration, and granting the Zionist movement the status of representing Jewish national interests.{{sfn|Gorny|1987|loc=Historical Background}} In particular, the Jewish Agency, the embodiment of the Zionist movement in Palestine, was made a partner of the mandatory government, acquiring international diplomatic status and representing Zionist interests before the League of Nations and other international venues.{{sfn|Khalidi|2020|loc=Chapter 1}}

The British mandate effectively established a Jewish quasi-state in Palestine, lacking only full sovereignty. This lack of sovereignty was crucial for Zionism at this early stage, as the Jewish population was too small to defend itself against the Arabs of Palestine. The British presence provided a necessary safeguard for Jewish nationalism. To achieve political independence, Jews needed Britain's support, particularly in land purchase and immigration.{{sfn|Dieckhoff|2003|pp=7–8, 42}} Following the Balfour declaration, Jewish immigration to Palestine grew from 9,149 immigrants in 1921 to 33,801 in 1925—by the end of the mandate period, the Jewish population in Palestine would have nearly tripled, eventually reaching one third of the country's population.{{sfn|Roy|2016|loc=Political Background to the British Mandate Period (1917–1948)}}

The mandatory administration implemented policies that favored the development of the capitalist sector, predominantly associated with the Jewish community, while disadvantaging the Arab non-capitalist sector. Between 1933 and 1937, government spending was concentrated in two main areas — development and economic services, and defense — with the former focusing on infrastructural improvements (such as railways, roads, bridges, and other public works) that were particularly beneficial for capitalist production.<ref>{{harvnb|Roy|2016|p=38|ps=: "The Mandate administration further exacerbated the problems of the Arab producer by pursuing fiscal policies that, in effect, promoted the development of the Jewish capitalist sector at the expense of the Arab noncapitalist sector.
First, government expenditure in the five years between 1933 and 1937 was greatest for two single sectors: development and economic services, and defense. The former referred to the development of infrastructural services and public works—the improvement and construction of railways, roads, bridges, communications, telegraphs, harbors, and airports—which were far more important for capitalist (as opposed to noncapitalist) production, largely the domain
of the Jewish sector."}}</ref> In contrast to the Jewish population, the Arabs did not benefit from any government protections such as social security, employment benefits, trade union protection, job security and training opportunities. Arab wages were one third of their Jewish counterparts (including when paid by the same employer).{{sfn|Roy|2016|loc=British Government Policies}} The mandate also included an article describing self-governing institutions intended only for the Jewish population of Palestine. No similar support or recognition was provided to the Palestinian majority during the time of the mandate.{{sfn|Khalidi|2020|loc=Chapter 1}}
By enabling the Zionist institutions to serve as a parallel government to the Mandate, the British facilitated the separation of the economy and legitimized their quasi-state status. Accordingly, these institutions, which purported to act in the interests of Jews everywhere, were able to funnel resources into the Jewish sector in Palestine, heavily subsidizing the dominate Jewish economy.{{sfn|Roy|2016|loc=British Government Policies}} The nucleus of the Jewish quasi-state was the [[Histadrut]], established in 1920 as an independent social, political and economic institution.{{sfn|Sternhell|1999|loc=Introduction}}{{efn|"The Histadrut is not a trade union, not a political party, not acooperative society, nor is it a mutual aid association, although it doesengage in trade union activity, in politics, cooperative organizationand mutual aid. But it is much more than that. The Histadrut is a covenant of builders of a homeland, founders of a state, renewers of anation, builders of an economy, creators of culture, reformers of a society."{{sfn|Shimoni|1995|p=201}}}} The Histadrut also exercised significant control over the [[Haganah]], a Jewish defense force formed in 1920 in reaction to Arab riots. Originally created to defend the community, Haganah evolved into a permanent underground reserve army fully integrated into the Jewish political structure. Although the British authorities disapproved of the Haganah, particularly its method of stealing arms from British bases, they did not disband it.{{sfn|Cleveland|2010|p=252}} The Histadrut operated as a completely independent entity, without interference from the British mandate authorities. Ben-Gurion saw the Histadrut's detachment from socialist ideology to be one of its key strengths; indeed it was the General Organization of Workers in Israel. In particular, the Histadrut worked towards national unity and aimed to dominate the capitalist system en route to gaining political power, not to create a socialist utopia.{{sfn|Sternhell|1999|loc=Ends and Means: The Labor Ideology and the Histadrut}}

As secretary general of the Histadrut and leader of the Zionist labor movement, Ben-Gurion adopted similar strategies and objectives as Weizmann during this period, disagreeing primarily on issues of specific tactical moves up until 1939.{{sfn|Flapan|1979|p=131}} The middle class grew dramatically in size with the arrival of the fourth aliyah in 1924, motivating a political shift within the labor movement.{{sfn|Dieckhoff|2003|p=91}} It was during this period that the political strategy of the labor movement would solidify.{{sfn|Sternhell|1999|p=219}} The founding of the Mapai party unified the labor movement, making it the dominant force. The party saw economic control as essential to facilitating Zionist settlement and achieving political power: "the economic question is not one of class; it is a national question".{{sfn|Sternhell|1999}} For Ben-Gurion, the transformation from "working class to nation" was intertwined with his rejection of diaspora life, as he would declare: the "weak, unproductive, parasitical Jewish masses" must be converted "to productive labor" in service of the nation.{{sfn|Dieckhoff|2003|pp=89–95}}