[dalbasal]

You've got the history garbled. The Palmach enforced a truce during this period. I suppose you could call Etzel rebels. They aren't the ones who formed the State of Israel, or led the majority militia. There were also jerusalemite militias insurrecting. against British rule and bedouin rebels in Transjordan. A lot of people disliked the British presence. Palmach didn't like them either, but they declared a truce so long as they were fighting Nazism.

None of the fighting had anything to do with anything but migration, with the primary emphasis on getting Jews out of the Reich. Ships being returned to Italian ports were the main incendiary. You are caught up the the boilerplate, which preceded any document from that era. It was the British trying to square the circle of contradictory promises made to different factions. Jews & Arabs. Hashemites & Bedouins, etc.

It's also not the beginning of anything, neither conflict with the British or Arabs. It's certainly not what the country is "centred on." Most notably, it's the only time Jewish militias fought one another.

Who care about insurrection against Britain anyway? Why?

[whimsicalism]

Sure, if you only look at the first 5 years after the white paper. Post-1945, the Palmach were actively bombing police stations & bridges, I know this for a fact, my friend/acquaintance was literally there doing this, he disliked Etzel/Irgun, but they were both fighting the British at that point.