Regarding your first paragraph, I think that’s exactly what’s happening here. Companies don’t make decisions for the benefit of the populations that consume their product - public companies make decisions to benefit their share holders. Dictators don’t make decisions for the benefit of their oppressed citizens - they make decisions to benefit the small number of people that keep them in power and aid in their reign. So a dictatorship making large value deals with a company seems reaaallyy unlikely to lead to any net positive for any of the relevant populations.

Additionally, your phrasing here sounds like you’re writing for an AP exam - Saudi Arabia hasn’t ‘faced challenges’ with upholding human rights and more than the Unabomber ‘faced challenges’ with not killing people with explosives. The nation has consistently and repeatedly (and continues to) flagrantly violate the most basic tenants of human rights and has yet to be held accountable owing entirely to their vast wealth and geopolitical control of the world’s primary energy source.

One can not reasonably argue in good faith that making a nation with a long history of intentional human rights violations, slavery, political and apolitical assassinations, etc - will suddenly (or gradually) improve by acquiring more of the same wealth that has historically enabled them to commit these acts.

There are no nuances or complexities that justify these actions and no tangible benefits associated with ‘a thoughtful dialogue and critique’. Any further communication here just gives you more of a platform to shill for your employers.

So yep, ‘fuck them’ and probably you.