Here's what I know about that:
- "Jordan's Arab Legion was considered the most effective Arab force.
Armed, trained and commanded by British officers, this 8,000–12,000 strong force was organized in four infantry/mechanized regiments supported by some 40 artillery pieces and 75 armoured cars.[74]
Until January 1948, it was reinforced by the 3,000-strong Transjordan Frontier Force.[77]
As many as 48 British officers served in the Arab Legion."
On the other hand, Israelies:
- "...also managed to obtain stocks of British weapons due to the logistical complexity of the British withdrawal, and the corruption of a number of officials"
I don't know if actions of British lead Jordanian units were sanctioned by the British government, but I do know:
- "The Arab Legion joined the war in May 1948, but fought only in the areas that King Abdullah wanted to secure for Jordan: the West Bank and East Jerusalem."
Clearly the Brits were hoping to keep friends on all sides, and help make Britain's various partitions of the old Ottoman Empire work as nations.
The Brits also deserve some credit for the 1917 Balfour Delcaration, and for help to Jews in general.
Sure, if like many, you feel that such aid was grossly inadequate, the fact remains it compares favorably with aid from other countries -- Franklin Roosevelt's USA notably.
For a more favorable view of British relations to Jews, I recommend Martin Gilbert's "Churchill and the Jews, a Lifelong Friendship".
Yes, I have to recognize the following claim:
- "Britain, along with Spain and France, are among the least sympathetic countries to Israel in the world.[120]"
But first, I doubt if it's true, even today, and second to whatever degree true, it surely reflects influences of those countries' Muslim populations.
Or perhaps just of anti-Israel posters at Wikipedia!
Finally I don't see, how can this particular incident in 1948 cause you to blame the Brits for starting the First World War in 1914?