History has been written and there is no point in pinning blames! The Brits wanted a way out and religious card was played. It is over and out. The two nations should try to live in peace but looks like not.
Avoiding a Partition would have got us an India that looked like today's Pakistan. Nehru wanted a strong centre for a strong India. A weak India would have been united!
After 68 years discussing of a decision taken by the then leaders have no meaning. Using if or but have no sense in it. It is as good as talking of different Kings who ruled this country comparing each other. Similarly some who worked close to a popular person/powered men - after the death of the leader or after his parting/retirement speaks of non-sense.
One may recall a kid story of two cats fighting for butter with a monkey as umpire. The umpire was not selfless as he ruled sub continent for 200 years & knew her worth of it for tiny Britain for their future generation. The only way for them was to create conflict of interest in the sub continent people by hook or crook & exploit them & exploit for their interest. This was the moot cause for partition.This was compounded by the ambition of two individuals.
To my perception, gathered through reading several accounts of Indian History, it becomes apparent that the British had partition in their agenda. Mr Mountbatten was chosen as the last Viceroy of India, primarily keeping in view of the partition of the country. It could be that Nehru/Jinnah were "used" to accomplish this objective.
