If you're not consistent in your policies, you can't expect consistent behavior in return.
You can't expect consistent behavior in return in any case, because each country, each person, is going to do what is best for them anyway. So the objective is to make sure their cooperation in their best interest. Which the US most certainly has not done.
Iran - pulled support for the Shah because of human rights violations - which was true. Keeping a religious population who wanted Sharia law and a theocracy in power in check for a leader with no popular mandate, turns out it required a lot of brutal imprisonment and torture. There was never a doubt the US was supporting the bad guy here after assassinating the previously popularly elected leader. It so happens that when the US under the Carter administration pulled the rug out from under the Shah and supported the charismatic, exiled Khomeini to return to the country from France, he sealed the Shah's doom and we ended up with something worse. At least from our perspective. And the perspective of any Persian who isn't a religious zealot. It was known at the time they'd export Shia fundamentalism. And they have. Honestly the remarkable thing has been they haven't been more successful. Partly because the US has supported other bad guys
Saudi Arabia - have openly campaigned for the severe reduction and even elimination of the widespread use of fossil fuels. Regardless of the reasons, this is an existential threat to Saudi Arabia. Thinking they're going to be happy about this is farcical. In addition, there is widespread pressure to quit supporting the leader of Saudi Arabia because he murders and chops up journalists for being critical of his murderous regime. Again, I would point to the Shah and Iran. Yes, he's a very terrible human being. However, if something replaces the Saudi royal family as the government for the country, the chances of it being supportive of the west are zero. Then Biden goes begging for his assistance after painting him as a horrible human being. Are we surprised they're not jumping all over themselves to help? And the recommended response is to cut them off. That's smart. Who needs Saudi Arabia anyway? Let's allow the Arabs to create another caliphate. What's the worst that can happen?
Saying Israel is #teamRussia is idiotic. Israel is #teamIsrael. They are never going to be team USA. Never. Their whole goal is to survive on a tiny sliver of land surrounded by people whose number one objective is to wipe the area clean of any Jewish presence whatsoever. There are a number of people in Israel who realize there's never going to be a two country system that leads to a permanent peace (it won't). There's a greater likelihood that countries currently unopposed to their existence end up opposing their existence in the future.
It almost happened with Egypt when Mubarak fell - another bad guy we supported until we pulled the rug out from under him in favor of an NGO supported democratic movement that predictably ended up being dominated by Muslims who want Sharia law. We're very fortunate in the west that was ended in a coup. Too bad we couldn't have gotten the same result for Erdogan. But the EU gave him an excuse to severely purge the Army because they cited Turkiye's many military coup's as a reason Turkiye could not receive an invitation. Another unintended consequence.
There are three main powers in the middle east vying for leadership of the Muslim world. Iran, Turkiye, and Saudi Arabia. You can lump the various prominent terrorist organizations in here, too, whether ISIS, Al Qaeda, or whomever. But those are the three national states with leaders at the head actively trying to extend their influence in various ways. Turkiye is the most western oriented, but Erdogan has taken all kinds of steps, especially since he became ruler for life, to make that less so. Punishing him for this isn't a realistic option because geographically Turkiye ranks right up there as one of the most important military locations in the world.
It's not a black and white world. You aren't going to be able to give a country military and financial assistance and expect them to do you your bidding. It's not how it works. Especially if being seen in cahoots with the US diminishes their influence in the region in very important ways. Not to mention the US changes their mind on what's in the US's best interests depending on who is in power.
IMO the most critical thing politically is to keep the middle east from forming another caliphate under a united leadership. Not that it seems even remotely feasible, but given that it's a fundamental part of their beliefs and their history, and it isn't that long ago historically - only a little over 100 years - since it existed, and there's a huge amount of popular support for its return in the region, it's a huge boon that the region is as fractured as it is. It's in the West's best interests to keep it that way. That's way more important, frankly, than whether they more strongly support Ukraine or not.