This video is complete nonsense click bait. I don't know where to begin explaining its flawed, inherent, confirmation bias-riddled claptrap. I shall simply refute a single point of interest.
ANYONE who's played the Civilization series would immediately set this YouTuber right on his suggestion that Pakistan has a weak starting position. Pakistan has some great access to early resources, a huge river, mountains for defensive units to be stationed on and a coast. If a Civ starting position reflected reality, Pakistan would do well with a compact "tall" expansion strategy, settling a few super-cities along the Indus. Population would rise quickly and in any version of Civ, population is key, whether it's rapid acquisition of specialists, pop-rushing wonders and units or tapping into high yield tiles early on. Pakistan would be an ancient/medieval era powerhouse with a mix of luxury and strategic resources and great position for exploration across Asia for those early game goody huts. There would be plenty of barbarians for early xp generation and promotion of units and contact with numerous civs could be made in all directions. Pakistan is greatly positioned to annihilate India's early game expansion/exploration desires because it could effectively block off India's westward and northward movement so India would be forced to settle cities in jungle terrain to its south east, which ANY serious Civ player will tell you is suicide in the early game because jungle terrain has minimal production value. Until India unlocks sailing tech, it's screwed basically because Pakistan will block its expansion. Finally, there are several powerful natural wonders that wouldn't be too far away in the west and north if Pakistan could get a settler headed that way (Mt Everest is a potential game breaker) before others reach them. Likewise there are some great westward city states like Jerusalem, Babylon or Muscat for lucrative early alliances.
This YouTube clown clearly has no idea about Civilization whatsoever.
