I see how this can be framed as "oppressive government can make rational decisions to preserve its status quo" while avoiding the elephant in the room. But this analysis can be applied to any oppressive government (Argentina of the 80's, Zimbabwe of the last 20 yrs, Idi Amin, etc. So, from that perspective this is true. At the same time their government is more interested in maintaining a theocracy and suppressing internal opposition than in providing a functional government for its people -all the while presenting it internally as an "us against them" issue.