"But cease all military action, all economic pressures, and all diplomatic maneuvering against any one side in the Muslim civil war. Become, as we have in other civil wars, a genuine neutral."
I agree with the above statement.
However, changing the political/economic/military calculus takes a lot more than a shift in narrative. And beyond that, who controls the narrative and will it reach a majority of persons.
This analysis misses a lot, and most of what it misses comes from pretending to hold the West blameless.
From the onset of carving up the Ottoman Empire after WW I and WW II, and assassinating the Shah of Iran in l953... the West, primarily the U.S. and its NATO allies, has meddled in the Middle East in ways that ruptured it into many pieces.
Therefore, to take the stance that the problem today is that of a "civil war" while leaving out which players inflamed old sectarian divides and hatreds, is like a murderer saying that he has no responsibility for what was done to the family he "deleted."
Granted, since murderers seldom excel at "Social Work," the original statement of leave the Middle East alone holds. There is also the work of remedial action, Truth and Reconciliation commissions, and allotting funds to repair at least some of what was broken.