What if India had not been Partitioned in 1947?

Jaithirth Rao in The Indian Express:

Jaswant Singh’s book is a brilliant landmark encompassing accepted and contrarian views. According to him, Partition (he uses the emotion-laden word “vivisection”) is the central event of 20th-century Indian history. Singh is wrong. The central event of the times was the ending of the British Raj. He argues that Nehru and Patel were as responsible for Partition as Jinnah. He is right. It is his position that Partition was a great mistake that is questionable.

“Let’s look at the counter-factual “where would we be if Partition had not happened?”

“It’s impossible to say whether we would have been better or worse. We might have become a fractious violence-ridden Lebanon. We might have splintered into dozens of warring states, something that has happened before in our history. If things went well, we might have been a prosperous, happy utopia! This question does not have many takers among Pakistanis or Bangladeshis. Most of them, with a few exceptions, think that Partition was good. We must perforce take them at face value.”

Read the full article: Why Jaswant is wrong

Also read: Mahatma Gandhi stabbed inner-party democracy

Amitava Kumar: What if we were together?