History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

In Anne Applebaum's recent book Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944-1956 she claims the USSR supported the new state of Israel and states "Stalin believed Israel would quickly join the communist camp".

She doesn't cite any references for this, but is it true? And if so, what grounds were there for Stalin believing Israel would align itself with the Soviet Union?

share|improve this question
Given the nature of much of the people around Ben Gurion, as well as Stalin's own mindset, it wouldn't surprise me in the least, but I know of no written record of Stalin ever stating so publicly. – jwenting Jun 6 '13 at 6:36
This excellent question is quite difficult to answer. @Drux and jwenting correctly point out that the Labor Party was a left one and had considerable respect for the USSR at the time. However, they were not quite the usual Stalinist cadre-fodder: (a) they were as Zionist as Socialist (b) they were not very radical, much more like social democrats than like communists. On the other hand there was a bona fide communist party and a more left radical party, Mapam, who looked much more amenable to communist plans. So perhaps Stalin was counting on them taking power later and becoming his stooges. – Felix Goldberg Jun 6 '13 at 12:26
It's hard to tell because Stalin did not really consult with anyone and left no paper trail that documents his personalistic decision-making. (notifying also @jwenting) For those who are interested in the background, some pointers can be found in history.stackexchange.com/a/8827/1569 – Felix Goldberg Jun 6 '13 at 12:27
@jwenting: Very possible! Of course, there was one crucial difference between a Kibbutz and a kolchoze - memebership in the former was voluntary, whereas in the latter it was at gunpoint. But such differences could have escaped Stalin... – Felix Goldberg Jun 6 '13 at 14:22
@FelixGoldberg - most of early Zionists were quite hard left, Labor was just one manifestation of that. – DVK Jun 7 '13 at 16:30
up vote 12 down vote accepted
  1. It is clear that Stalin supported the creation of Israel. From the Wiki:

    For Soviet foreign policy decision-makers, pragmatism took precedence over ideology. Without changing its official anti-Zionist stance, from late 1944, until 1948 and even later, Joseph Stalin adopted a pro-Zionist foreign policy, apparently believing that the new country would be socialist and would accelerate the decline of British influence in the Middle East.[cite: Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (1987) p.527]

    On May 17, 1948, three days after Israel declared independence, the Soviet Union legally recognized it de jure, becoming the first country to grant de jure recognition to the Jewish state..In addition to the diplomatic support, arms from Czechoslovakia, part of the Soviet bloc, were crucial to Israel in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.

    It's quite clear that this would NOT have happened had Stalin disagreed.

  2. As far as " what grounds were there for Stalin believing Israel would align itself with the Soviet Union":

    • as the commenters noted, most of the early Zionists and founders of Israel were politically quite left and socialist-bent. I consider this fact to bee too well known and trivial to bother with sites, but if you wish I'll add them. Ex: [1].

    • Also, at the time, British and the West in general started swinging towards being more pro-Arab due to geopolitical concerns, notably oil (Lawrence of Arabia being a good example; and British resistance to the creation of Israel despite Balfour commitments being another example). As such, Israel would be a natural counterweight for Stalin to extend his influence in Near East, the same way United States was using Israel once the geopolitical alignments reversed themselves in 1970s when Arab states became Soviet clients and Israel American one.

share|improve this answer
Being "left and socialist-bent" is a far cry from toeing the Moscow line and the latter was all that mattered to Stalin. – sds Apr 14 '15 at 11:14
This is quite a shocker for me. It begs the question of exactly how the "swap", if I may call it that, occurred, because not long after this: Israel started getting western assistance making nuclear reactors, and USSR started supporting Syria, Afghanistan, and other Mideast and North Africa areas. – DrZ214 Aug 4 '15 at 6:12
+1 for pointing out that pragmatism is an important factor (if not most important) over naive ideas about ideology based friendship: having good relationship with Israel is a chance to get a influence in the region and weaken the Western influence. – Greg Jan 1 at 12:28

Stalin was an ideologue, but not a very rigid one, and he was not an idiot.

He supported Israel because it was a thorn in the side of the British Empire (and its Arab relationships), not because the Zionist were left wing.

After all, left wing or right wing, anyone who did not toe the Moscow's line precisely was an enemy. Stalin knew full well that people neither join the communist camp nor enter the prison camp voluntarily, and did not expect Israel to do so; and he did not have the resources to turn Israel into another Poland or Romania.

share|improve this answer
@Oldcat: nope. Emigration means loss of human material. Communists never encouraged that, they just sent the undesirables to labor camps. – sds Jul 23 '14 at 21:52
@Oldcat: emigration was VERY strongly discouraged. Otherwise half the country would have left. – sds Jul 23 '14 at 22:06
So was being Jewish. – Oldcat Jul 23 '14 at 22:09
@Oldcat - given that Stalin prepared to send a large chunk of Jews to Siberia in 1950s (see "Delo vrachei"), sds's comment is on the nose. Stalin needed Israel as a solution to USSR's "jewish problem" like a cow needs wheels. – DVK Jul 24 '14 at 15:27
Of this list, only Cuba was a member of the "communist camp" (i.e., toed the Moscow line), and Cuba received a lot of money (in the form of inflated sugar prices vs depressed oil prices). It goes without saying that all 4 brutally suppressed all dissent, so their people were not in the "camp" voluntarily. – sds Apr 14 '15 at 11:12

Maybe Stalin misoverestimated some things: 1-Jewish gratitude for the fact that it was the Red Army that defeated Hitler thereby saving their bacon, so to speak

2-Jewish powerand influence in the United States Not that it isn't and wasn't considerable, but deliver the US to him? Not even had they wished!

I read a theory that holds that Stalin thought he had a deal with the Jews- a Jewish state in Palestine for a Communist one in North America.


share|improve this answer
Welcome to the site! The answer you provided seems to be another question about the topic, which undermines the Q&A format. Good answers are objective and include sources. It may help to read How to Ask – Mark C. Wallace Dec 31 '15 at 9:45

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.