Battle of Jerusalem (1917) - Aftermath - Strategic Decisions

Strategic Decisions

It is clear in a letter written to his wife on the day of his ceremonial entry into Jerusalem that Allenby was keeping a close eye on the evolving situation: "The Turks are driven 3 or 4 miles down the Jericho road, to the East; and some 6 or 8 Miles to the North. Today we occupied Bethany."

Just before the capture of Jerusalem, the British War Office had been very worried about Allenby's extended advance and warned of a possible retirement back to Gaza and Beersheba if the war on the Western Front dictated the transfer of large numbers of troops from the Levant. However, this attitude changed immediately after Jerusalem was captured. The War Office then wanted to know how Allenby might exploit his success with the addition of a division from Mesopotamia.

Yesterday, morning, I reconnoitred our line, N. and E. slight fighting was in progress; and a few prisoners were coming in – fine, fighting Turks; well set up and well fed ... Later, I went to the railway station; where we are trying to repair and reconstruct what the Turks have damaged. Then Bols and I went to Bethlehem ... .

Allenby letter to Lady Allenby 14 December 1917

Allenby's great strategic successes from the end of October 1917 brought pressure from the British War Office to quickly finish the war in the Middle East. The War Cabinet instructed Robertson to telegraph Allenby on 18 December with a project based on alternative policies –

• (a) To complete the conquest of the whole of Palestine between Dan and Beersheba and hold the country for the remainder of the war
• (b) To continue the advance through Palestine and Syria to the vicinity of Aleppo so as to cause permanent interruption of railway communication with Mesopotamia.

Robertson requested that Allenby should send his "views as soon as possible as to the execution of these policies" and the length of time needed for the operations.

Allenby replied on 20 December 1917:

• (a) ... I calculate I might be able by June or July to place force of my present strength north of Nazareth–Haifa line, assuming enemy cannot oppose me with more than about 60,000 fighting strength and provided there are no special difficulties met with in railway construction.
• (b) To advance further towards Aleppo would mean to move against Damascus and Beirut. On that front enemy is served by broad–gauge railway with good lateral communications and apparently ideal ground for defence. Broad–gauge railway would put him on level with me as regards numbers that could be maintained. I should require 16 or 18 divisions besides my mounted corps to ensure success against Damascus–Beirut line if strongly held, but this is probably more than my railway could support. My estimate is made on the supposition enemy will make use of his broad-gauge railway to its full capacity. I would point out that Aleppo is 350 miles distant and my single line of railway advances about half a mile a day. Railhead of my double line is at Bir el Mazar, but the doubling of railway has had to be stopped during my present advance. For my immediate plans see my telegram No. E.A. 598 14 December, and I think it advisable before advancing much further north to clear Turkish forces on Medina railway." Allenby had reported on 14 December that the rainy season would stop a renewal of operations for at least two months.