The topic at hand is about having more provinces in Pakistan , you have an example right across the border about where such a scheme has failed. Why would we want to repeat a failed experiement ?
Arguments that many member have put are mostly Panjab-centric which are aimed at dividing the polical base of rival politcal parties and nothing else.
Afghanistan has been a war torn country for nearly two and a half decades. Afghanistan has had a nearly similar provincial demarcation since the early sixties, as far as I know. Whatever they aimed to achieve, they could not do so in any way keeping in mind the effects of war across the country. And I'm unsure when they increased the number of provinces.
India on the other hand, has successfully shown how creation of new provinces can be really good for administrative and financial efficiency. You chose to ignore a working example on the eastern border while choosing a country on the western border that has been devastated by war after war. Local examples include Srilanka which has 9 provinces.
Geographically speaking,
Turkey with an area slightly smaller than ours but less than half of our population has
81 provinces. Turkey is followed by
Chile with
54 provinces.
Egypt is a bit larger in size than us (approx 1.26 times) has
29 governorates. It is followed in size by
Tanzania which has
26 provinces.
Nigeria has
36 states.
If you're going to comment on the economic performance of these countries, then it'll be lame and pointless for we are not discussing which country has achieved a higher standard of living for its citizens.
Administrative, Legislative, Political and Financial efficiency demand that a country of 180 million cannot be ruled by demarcating it into 5 provinces, where the theird tier of government i.e. local bodies are not in existence as well. Other countries do not put 90 million people under just one government because they seek to maximize representation and create a focused government rather than a dispersed one which cannot handle its resources (comparing Punjab with population of Indian states and/or Chinese provinces is lame as well as population densities are highly different)
Colonials did not need such small demarcations because they yielded power through their forces and they weren't necessarily focusing on providing you a better standard of living or giving you social welfare.
I cannot understand how you wish to address the needs of the people of Rahim Yar Khan and Taxila at the same time with just one level of legislative and financial governance in a country where bureaucrats have barricaded all forms of access to government resources, programmes and transparency.
Come out of your view that if the word Pakistan was based on the alphabets of the existing provinces, it will have to remain so. Pakistan is more than a word, it is a nation of 180 million people who seek to serve their motherland. Demarcations will only bring benefits, they cannot break or disintigerate the federation in any way. We'll have a focused system of governance and it is the feudal and totalitarian mentality which seeks to dominate everything that has been blocking the creation of new provinces for 63 years. The pandora's box is open now, protests in Hazara are acting like a catalyst and we should aim to maximize profit from this situation by establishing new provinces so that people will have their governments, which are accessible to them and which have to focus on projects on a limited scale compared to their gargantuan number of projects that existing provinces have to handle courtesy their enormous size.
The basic aim of smaller provinces is to break the BIG BROTHER concept of Punjab... for PML N or Q all they need is to be a majority in Punjab and they rule the country. 
