Peter MacDonald
In the chaos of today’s Middle East, few recall that the origins of modern geopolitical control over the region, including the founding of the State of Israel, were shaped significantly by New Zealand and Australian troops under British command during World War I. Far from playing mere supporting roles, these soldiers were handpicked by the British High Command for their resilience, self-reliance and aggressive fighting spirit. At a time when Britain faced dwindling manpower and morale among its own troops, it was the men from the Antipodes who delivered the critical victories in the Middle East, with no plan B.
By 1916 the British Empire’s campaign in the Sinai and Palestine was gaining urgency. The Ottoman Empire, allied with Germany, controlled the region. Britain’s imperial ambitions and access to oil routes depended on defeating the Ottomans and securing Palestine. The British command placed its trust in the ANZAC Mounted Division, especially the New Zealand Mounted Rifles Brigade and the Australian Light Horse. These were men born of the frontier: physically fit, tough and strategically adaptable.
One of the most pivotal victories came at Beersheba on 31 October 1917. The famed charge of the Australian Light Horse Brigade, supported by New Zealand troops securing the Ottoman left flank, broke through enemy lines and secured the town and its crucial wells. This flank action by the New Zealand Mounted Rifles destroyed the Turkish positions and was critical: without it, the Australians would have faced devastating enfilading fire and the charge may have failed. It was a bold and swift offensive that marked the beginning of the Ottoman collapse in Palestine.
Commanding key elements of this campaign was Major-General Edward Chaytor, a New Zealander born in Nelson. He led Chaytor’s Force, a composite unit of New Zealand, British, and Indian troops who played a vital role in operations across the Jordan Valley, Es Salt and Amman. Chaytor’s leadership and his men’s discipline were instrumental in ensuring a succession of victories that led to Ottoman withdrawal.
Under Chaytor’s oversight also stood the Jewish Legion, formally known as the 38th, 39th and 40th Battalions of the Royal Fusiliers. Composed of Jewish volunteers from the United Kingdom, Russia, the United States, Canada, Argentina, South Africa, Palestine, Australia, and New Zealand, this unit carried deep symbolic weight. Among the Legion’s members were Zionist leaders like David Ben-Gurion (later Israel’s first prime minister) and Ze'ev Jabotinsky. While the legion’s combat role was limited and largely formal, its presence signified the rising Zionist hope for a national homeland in Palestine. The fact that this unit served under New Zealand military command, and that its formation was supported by political will from Wellington, reflects the deep, though little-known role, New Zealand played in this pivotal chapter of Middle East history.
The next defining moment came in December 1917, with the capture of Jerusalem. General Edmund Allenby led British and Allied troops into the city, dismounting and entering on foot as a sign of respect for its sacred significance. New Zealand and Australian forces were critical in securing Jerusalem, with Kiwis involved in fierce fighting on the approach to the city, particularly along the high ground and outer defensive positions. The New Zealand Mounted Rifles helped secure areas north and east of the city, contributing to the final encirclement that forced the Ottoman retreat.
In a public parade staged in Jerusalem’s centre, Allenby paid tribute to the colonial troops, famously declaring that this was the end of the Crusades. After centuries of bloodshed and conflict over the Holy Land, it was, ironically, soldiers from the Southern Hemisphere, from humble farms and remote settlements in New Zealand and Australia, who secured it for the British Empire. For Allenby, the symbolism was powerful: the last crusade had been fought, and won, by Kiwis and Aussies.
Only weeks earlier, in November 1917, the British Government had issued the Balfour Declaration, announcing its support for a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. With the Ottomans on the run and Allied victory in sight, this was not just a diplomatic gesture, it was a strategic signal. Britain aimed to secure Jewish political support, especially from the United States and Russia, while simultaneously laying the groundwork for a future British-controlled Middle East.
But even earlier, in 1916, Britain and France had secretly drafted the Sykes-Picot Agreement, enabled by Lawrence of Arabia’s campaigns, carving up the soon-to-fall Ottoman Empire into Western-controlled spheres of influence. These lines, drawn with imperial logic but having no regard for ethnic or religious realities, would later spark decades of tension and conflict that are ongoing today with the Kurdish peoples.
After the final military defeat of the Ottomans, formalised in the Treaty of Sèvres in 1920, Britain and France took control of the region. These arrangements handed vast oil reserves and political leverage to financial centers like the City of London and Wall Street, embedding Western economic dominance in the Middle East for the next century and beyond.
New Zealand’s role in these events is often underplayed and understated, yet from Beersheba to Jerusalem, and through the leadership of figures like Nelson-born, General Chaytor, New Zealand troops were not auxiliary: they were central. The geopolitical aftermath, including the eventual creation of the State of Israel in 1948, backed by lingering British commitments, was set in motion by these 1917 victories.
As the world debates the on-going crises in Gaza and the wider Middle East, it is time to recall the real origins of the region’s modern political map – and New Zealand’s outsized role in drawing it.
To sum up: Britain’s involvement in Palestine was driven solely by strategic interests, most notably, securing access to vital oil resources of the region, and maintaining control over key trade routes like the Suez Canal. To safeguard these priorities, Britain made competing and conflicting promises to both Arab leaders and the Zionist movement, aiming to keep influence over both communities. This delicate balancing act, focused more on imperial control than on fulfilling either side’s aspirations, led to a standoffish approach in securing Palestine until the end of its mandate in 1948. Many Arabs felt deeply betrayed by the British following World War I, particularly because of promises made during the war that were never honored. The most prominent symbol of this betrayal was TE Lawrence, better known as Lawrence of Arabia, who died in an accident soon after the war.
