I see. I just disagree about a couple of things.
The british empire cracked in the first world war, and broke apart during the first few years of the second world war. The US moved into pacific territories controlled by britain, hence freeing up british influence over southeast asia. It was the powerhouse area of britain which brought in safe passage for sea ships, cheap agricultural products among other things.
I agree with the other stuff. Do you think that the Qaid wanted the land to be a secular democracy, with islamic roots, for muslims. Or did he want strict sunni sharia law?
In the first few years of the second war the empire lost few of its possessions other than east asia. It was very much alive and kicking by 1945, when at the end of the war it fielded its most powerful armed forces ever. The Empire really only began diminishing quickly after the Suez Crisis, when it was forced to back off against one of its former possessions.
As for the Quaid.... he quite shrewdly managed to be ambiguous enough to retain both the Islamists and secularists on his sides by making statements that supported both, whilst not contradicting themselves. One can only imagine that in his wisdom he believed that as one man he alone had no right to dictate the nature of the state and instead left the decision to the people, through their elected representatives.