I am not a religious person and I cannot stand the Iranian theocracy. But the question "Which Muslim country will be next?" is quite appropriate.
You speak as if there is a Western conspiracy against Muslim nations, but there are clear examples of Muslim countries that are getting developed and are receiving a lot of foreign investment, and they are in good relations with the West. The UAE is the best example, but even a large country like Saudi Arabia is going into the right direction.
The secret is to not antagonize the West and threaten them, like Saddam, Gaddafi and the Iranian Ayatollahs did.
As long as a country is seen as untrustworthy or is already an enemy, or a potential one in the future, the US is clearly not going to allow it to become too powerful.
If we look deeper, the US will not allow even its closest Western allies to become too powerful, as they want to make sure there is nobody strong enough to challenge their hegemony. They actively supported the loss of British and French colonial empires in the aftermath of WW2, as they wanted to see France and the UK becoming small irrelevant players at a global level.
The US even supported Egypt against Britain and France in the Suez war, and sanctioned their “closest ally” in order to make sure it loses a strategic asset and gets even weaker.
And they also pressured Italy to give up on its nuclear ambitions, so this has really nothing to do with being Muslim, but it is the de facto policy of the US to keep countries at a limited level of power, so they cannot exert too much influence.
My point is, there is a limit on how much power the US will allow its “allies” to have, and for their perceived rivals or enemies that threshold is much lower and the limits can be enforced through war if sanctions don’t work. As an ally, at least you are not at risk of war.