Forced Turkification by the young Turk government from 1913 on led to increased ethnic tensions. At one point the Turks will become too dominant and the Arabs - now nationalistic - won't like it.
The rise of the Young Turks was not inevitable.
You are right that their policies would have created friction, but independence movements are right out unless the place gets involved in a total war. Then there still won't be a national revolt, only a few opportunists will ally with the enemy to try to improve their position. In other words, exactly what happened in OTL.
What you're missing is that even in OTL, religion is by far the strongest indicator of national identification in the Middle East, Turkey included. Despite existing in nation-ish units for 90 years, the people still tend to identify predominately with their faith, not their "country." And the head of the Islamic faith was the Caliph in Constantinople. It's natural to see Turkish Nationalists in charge of a state and assume that this indicates strong nationalism, but in fact much the opposite was true. The Young Turks were trying to
create Turkish Nationalism, as later was Attaturk, and
in large part they failed.
If the Young Turks had continued to alienate the Arabs for another decade or so, what you'd see is the provinces assuming more local autonomy. You
wouldn't see independence movements because the only people who wanted independence were individuals in power locally (like the fellow who set up independent Egypt), not the people under them.
And the Catalonians(as well as the Basques) are definitely causing some troubles for the Spaniards as many wish independance. The Basques even fought for it for some time, and they still do. Besides, Catalonians and Arabs aren't comparable.
Actually, since 2001 the Basques have been quiet and the Catalonians quieter. What's left of the movement is old people still upset about the Nationalists cracking down on them. The younger generation could care less, and despite legal liguistic autonomy tend to choose to speak Spanish over their native tongue. What moves toward greater local independence you see there are often attributable to the EU - leaving Spain is less of a big deal if you're still in a larger framework. That said, there's currently more realistic moves for the independence of
Scotland than those two.
And yes, they aren't comparable to the Arabs. The Arabs don't care for our idea of the nation state and had 1200 years of history of submitting to whichever group had the caliph, regardless of ethnicity or background.
Also, the OE didn't have such a great level of control over Arabia. The Ottoman system was extremely corrupt and lacking in terms of Beuraeucratic manpower.
Actually, they had more control immediately before WW1 then they ever had before. As for extreme corruption, that happens not to be the case.
You don't seem to be very well read on this topic, so I recommend you take the time to read up on it before painting yourself further into the corner. You'll find Wikipedia is a poor choice.