What took them so long & why wait for India to initiate things like the 123 agreement too.
The internal Pakistani discourse over recognizing the importance of Pakistan's non-Islamic history and Pakistan's ongoing pursuit of an NSG exemption are two distinct issues with separate dynamics and drivers.
Your question on the 123 Agreement has been delved into in detail on other threads.
This is interesting considering that most Pakistanis here are unwilling to accept anything un islamic.
Not sure how will it be able to push back extremism & intolerance.
I'm not sure I agree with the first statement above - there are plenty of threads on this forum (with a lot of Pakistani support) that talk about Pakistan's ancient roots in the Mehargarh and Indus Civilization. Nationally, I don't have any empirical evidence to argue one way or the other, in terms of support or lack of on such issues.
Recognizing Pakistan's non-Islamic roots and paying tribute to the advanced civilizations (for their time) that our ancestors were part of, recognizing the achievements of rulers like Ranjit Singh etc. is important from the perspective of diluting the 'Muslim superiority complex' that some/many Pakistanis subscribe to. A major problem in the Islamic world in general is that religion (Islam) and the practice of that religion (being a 'true' Muslim) is incorrectly associated with the potential of 'national and civilizational advancement'. The fact that Pakistan's non-Islamic history is not given the attention it deserves, with the focus on Muslim rulers alone, strengthens the perception that Islam and being Muslim are necessary, and implicit in that belief is the attitude that 'non-Muslims are inferior', which in turn is can be exploited into violent extremism, justified by religious ideologues who want to use it as a tool to gain power.
By same logic Bangladesh too can have claim over Kashmir. Why only Pakistan.
The 'same logic' does not apply to the two scenarios - one references an artifact and how the origins of the artifact tie into a ruler and his empire centered in modern day Pakistan whereas the other has 'the same logic' in the mind of a fool.
On the subject of Bangladesh claiming J&K - Bangladesh is welcome to approach to approach the United Nations and request new UNSC Resolutions adding her as a claimant to the disputed territory of J&K, with the UNSC mandated referendum choices updated to include Bangladesh as an option.
Until Bangladesh does that, they have no claim over Kashmir.
Why should Pakistan however claim its non-Islamic past? Pakistan is avowedly Islamic and should continue on its path of claiming only the Muslim history.
I for one support Pakistanis in their fight for Shariah. It makes zero sense for a country to be born in the name of upholding and preserving Islam and then not legislating Shariah. Dichotomy.
Just because the modern Pakistani State is an 'Islamic Republic' doesn't change the fact that her ancient history is 'non-Islamic'. One doesn't have to revert to medieval practices to celebrate and recognize medieval history.
Pakistan's Islamic identity is her current identity, much like that of Egypt, Iran or Greece. Modern day Egypt and Iran are Islamic States, yet they celebrate their ancient non-Islamic culture (to varying degrees - someone with more knowledge can enlighten us further). The Greeks celebrate their ancient polytheistic Greek culture and history, while being a predominantly orthodox Christian nation (vs a Christian State). There is no reason why Pakistan should not do the same or cannot do the same.
