A bunch of muslim majority countries were on the verge of becoming more or less "modern" by western standards during the Cold War. Sure, it might have been very superficial and ultimately failed, but the Arab pan-nationalism of Nasser and the Hashemites and yes, even Hussein, at the very very creation of the iraqi B'aath party, was much more compatible with western ambitions for a truly interconnected world where, as expressed so eloquently further up in the thread by Kalam, we would be able to sell shit and spread our "self-evidently" superior political and moral code. Realpolitiks and pupeteering and "solutions" applied at a "global level" is what created this problem in the first place. I don't believe NATO or the USSR bear sole responsability, OPEC literally holding the world economy hostage is the only reason these fucking open sores of festering proselytizing theocracies are considered "allies" in the first place, and to be fair the entire societies from the bottom up were and still are operating on the same basic models they have operated on for centuries, i.e base tribalism on an ethnic and religious level. The sad thing is the House of Saud, as much as they are maligned, are actually much more "progressive" and tolerant than the vast majority of the people they rule over. This isn't going to change through western intervention, soft or otherwise. I know you apparently think the West is so incredibly wealthy and powerful it can overwrite reality on a mere whim if it is politically convenient to do so, but the change is only going to come from within. The failed Arab Spring "rebellions", cheerleaded blatantly by western media as eruptions of "freedom" and "liberty" and coopted almost immediately by islamic extremists on every front, have shown that clearly, if the failed afghan and iraqi occupations, devolving into civil war and ethnic cleansing, weren't enough of a hint.
Long term solution for me would be to work towards ending dependency on fossil fuels, particularly the ones whose sources are largely dictatorial totalitarian states that oppose everything we supposedly stand for (pretty much all of them), then we could stop pretending backwards shitholes whose policies are designed to hurt us like Saudi Arabia are anything but that instead of giving them the head of human rights seats on the UN. It's partly the reason I am so pro-nuclear, but also pro any other alternative form of energy as long as it is an efficient and workable solution. Yeah yeah green planet and all that, but the political implications of being "free" from oil and gas (never completely of course, always industrial processes that will need it, but at least reduce the need for it elsewhere) are of much more relevant and immediate interest.
Poll