Well, the Ha'aretz article discusses newly uncovered documents suggesting that war was encouraged by the British, which validated to some extent the claim by Ben-Gurion that they instigated the war.

However, it's likely that the Arabs would have invaded anyways. At least, that's if we take them at their word, as they put it before the UN Partition Plan was passed in November 1947. They claimed a Palestinian uprising would occur, that no Arab government could allow the plan to be implemented after firing up their populace against it, that the blood would flow like rivers, that there would be a war of extermination, to name a few quotes (all of the quotes came before the partition plan was even passed in November, the last of which was from the Arab League Secretary-General). As far as we can tell, it does seem the British encouraged the invasion, but I don't think there's a consensus just yet saying that they were the main reasons. That may end up being the case, but I doubt there's enough documentation to prove that since saying it was all the British agents' fault is nearly impossible. How do you get into the head of Arab leaders to see for sure what would have happened? British agents could absolutely have contributed, and I have no doubt historians have been examining the documents and what they say to revise their views slightly to accommodate that, but it wasn't "caused" by the British, at least I wouldn't imagine historians to agree that it was. I wouldn't say so personally, based on what I've seen so far.