Well, avoiding the detail
As a general rule, I don't approve of subsidy of any kind - ever - of anything. Government money consistently distorts markets and props up the otherwise unsupportable. That includes BA. However that's by-the-by.
Your view is contentious in that there are many that disagree (avoiding the detail) as there are many that agree. Neither side has a monopoly of truth. I suspect that as always, the truth lies somewhere in between: Neither as much nor as little as is claimed by the partisans.
The ME may enjoy an aviation friendly environment, and the rest of the world may not. The rest of the world has unionised workforces and all the complications of hiring mature, thinking humans with sophisticated expectations and behavioural patterns that make life complicated for both airline managements and sometimes customers. That's because they are an integral part of the societies that they operate within. The rules and regs, airport and transport infrastructure and social practises are the result of long and hard-earned experience and money.
From a customer perspective, the success of the ME airlines is simply the market demonstrating its' power: They offer a good product at a competitive price and that is impossible to argue against. However, customers need to be aware of the effect of their decisions. The global dominance of the big 3 comes at a price: Freedom is not Free. If we choose to outsource our airlines to a society that criminalises homosexuality, promotes slave labour, restricts Trade Union membership and promotes Nepotism and Graft then that is our choice - just as it is their choice to create a society of their own model. Their airlines are putting ours out of business: That's the market at work, but lets at least be fully aware of what it is that we are buying.