India and Pakistan both are fundamentally rooted in national bourgeois collaboration with the British empire. Lord Mountbatten's charm was "irresistible" to Gandhi, Jinnah, Nehru and Patel. The partition was a way for the bourgeois of India to keep their status. The Radcliffe Award and Partition itself led to communal, racial and religious violence which tore apart a region of centuries-old communal harmony!
The Naval Strikes of 1946 and the set-up of barrages after the Bombay strike of the same year all proved that it was not religious or communal conflict that led to Partition - it was the struggle of the bourgeois in India to preserve their ranks that led to it.
Laal Khan in his book "Partition - can it be undone" said this about the nature of the Freedom movement in India:
"The educated Indian elite was either from the ruling dynasties, which had
betrayed the masses, or from the middle and ruling classes, which were sponsored and pampered
by the British civil service to perpetuate their rule. This new generation of the elite was educated
and trained in Britain in order to implement the British political setup in the Indian political
arena. In reality, two British universities, Cambridge and Oxford, trained and indoctrinated the
Indian elite into the British political system, culture, customs and lifestyle
Even in their revolts and independence stunts, leaders like Nehru, Gandhi and Jinnah were
hostages to the British parliamentary setup and its economics and to capitalism on which it was
founded. The independence movement was mainly in control of this emerging bourgeoisie,
influenced and propped up by the Raj."
It is an historic irony that not only were the leaders of pre-Partition India from these institutions but that the present
day rulers of the independent states also are products of those two universities and Lincoln’s Inn.