For the sake of argument here, consider a different perspective.
Can the voting US public really make a difference to foreign policy with the UAE\Saudi Arabia?
===
There's a grey area that's worthy of discussion, but we the voting public and as voters for democratically elected governments have cracked the shits with governments and international businesses for much less than what Saudi Arabia have done as a hostile, extremist sovereign third party has achieved. The only difference with Saudia Arabia is the ridiculous amount of financial influence they hold and this blurs borders on the cost/value of morality.
Most companies are beholden to their share holders to make a profit, but at which point do write a line in the sand and say, we no longer allow money to grey the lines on what we consider morale and immoral?
===
Also consider the US voting public are losing their shit about a wall at time of writing. That's a fairly black and white concern when you consider the implications and rather obvious cost benefit (slim to none). The border wall is potentially the biggest white elephant that's gone to US policy in recent times. It's not going to work. And it's going to be incredibly expensive if it is built. Yet... a strong portion of the public still want it built. And it will be at the expense of schools, public health, infrastructure, disaster relief.
Now consider.... you think the US voting public have the collective nous to make an international impact on US foreign policy with an extremist, wealthy 'ally' like UAE\Saudi Arabia? Sincerely?
I don't have the same faith in the public hive mind as you. But... I don't have another option that can help besides publicly discussing the point as we are. For all the benefits of how much better life is for those living right now vs prior generations. We do an exceptional job at shitting in our own beds over and over again.
Edit: structure and a few words.