what is the interest behind the silence of muslim countries including saudi arabia in the killing of muslims including palestine?

 The silence or limited action of many Muslim-majority countries, including Saudi Arabia, regarding the killing of Muslims in Palestine and other regions is a complex issue driven by a mix of political, economic, and strategic interests rather than a unified stance. While public sentiment in these countries often strongly supports the Palestinian cause, the governments’ responses—or lack thereof—reflect pragmatic calculations. Here’s an exploration of the key factors:

1. Geopolitical Alliances and Dependence on Western Powers: Many Muslim countries, particularly in the Arab world, rely heavily on the United States and other Western nations for security, economic support, or military aid. Saudi Arabia, for instance, has a long-standing strategic partnership with the U.S., which includes arms deals and protection against regional rivals like Iran. Taking a strong stance against Israel, a key U.S. ally, could jeopardize these relationships. This dependence often leads to muted responses or diplomatic caution, even when their populations demand action.
2. Regional Rivalries and Sectarian Divisions: The Muslim world is not a monolith, and internal divisions—especially between Sunni and Shia powers—shape responses. Saudi Arabia, a Sunni-majority state, views Iran, a Shia-majority state, as its primary regional adversary. Palestine’s resistance movements, like Hamas, have at times received support from Iran, which complicates Saudi involvement. Some Sunni-led governments see Hamas’s Islamist ideology (linked to the Muslim Brotherhood) as a domestic threat, fearing it could inspire unrest within their own borders. This rivalry often outweighs solidarity with Palestinians.
3. Domestic Stability and Authoritarian Control: Many Muslim governments, including Saudi Arabia, prioritize regime stability over ideological causes. The Palestinian issue resonates deeply with their populations, but public protests or calls for action can quickly turn into broader anti-government sentiment. To avoid this, regimes suppress activism—Saudi Arabia, for example, has cracked down on pro-Palestine demonstrations—or limit their involvement to symbolic gestures like statements or humanitarian aid, rather than risking escalation that could destabilize their rule.
4. Economic Interests and Normalization with Israel: Several Muslim countries have pursued economic and security benefits through normalizing ties with Israel, often sidelining the Palestinian cause. The Abraham Accords, signed by the UAE, Bahrain, and others, reflect this shift, with Saudi Arabia reportedly considering similar moves before the October 7, 2023, escalation paused such talks. Oil-rich states like Saudi Arabia also wield economic leverage (e.g., OPEC influence), but using it to pressure Israel or its allies could disrupt their own economies, a risk they’ve been unwilling to take.
5. Historical Precedents and Limited Influence: Past interventions by Arab states in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (e.g., the 1948 and 1967 wars) ended in military losses and territorial concessions, reducing appetite for direct confrontation. Today, countries like Egypt and Jordan, bound by peace treaties with Israel, prioritize maintaining those agreements over reigniting conflict. Saudi Arabia, never a frontline state in the conflict, has historically offered rhetorical support (e.g., the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative) but avoids actions that would overextend its influence or provoke retaliation.
6. Focus on Other Conflicts: Some Muslim countries are preoccupied with their own crises—Syria’s civil war, Yemen’s Saudi-led conflict, or economic struggles in places like Pakistan—leaving little capacity to prioritize Palestine. Saudi Arabia, for instance, has been criticized for its role in Yemen, where it leads a coalition accused of killing thousands of Muslims, suggesting a selective focus on conflicts aligning with its interests rather than a broader Muslim solidarity.

In summary, the silence of Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia stems from a calculated balancing act: preserving alliances, managing domestic control, countering regional foes, and safeguarding economic stability often take precedence over unified action for Palestine or other Muslim communities under threat. While this frustrates many of their citizens, it reflects a pragmatic, self-interested approach to a volatile region. Grassroots anger persists—visible in protests and online sentiment—but translating that into state policy remains stifled by these overriding priorities.

source

grok-3