There are at least three distinct possibilities.

Option 1: The adversaries add relays for the purpose of surveillance, snooping and/or spying.

option 2: The adversaries compromise otherwise acceptable relays for the purpose of surveillance, snooping and/or spying.

Option 3: The adversaries add relays for above purpose and compromise other relays for the above purpose simultaneously or otherwise.

In your question you have mentioned at least three adversaries interested in attacking Tor, I suggest the numbers are at least in dozens and at least five of them are colluding (The five eyes, namely US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand). Looking at this scenario I see little comfort in concluding that, they will dilute each other significance. On the contrary, this collusion will significantly increase their significance. Also when using option 2, even non colluding adversaries multiply their significance. You should understand that at times non-colluding adversaries do have a business dealings, and they may sell their information to the other adversaries for a price (not necessarily monetary price but sometimes for political, or tactical advantage and sometimes you scratch my back and I scratch your back situation).

There are at least three distinct possibilities.

Option 1: The adversaries add relays for the purpose of surveillance, snooping and/or spying.

option 2: The adversaries compromise otherwise acceptable relays for the purpose of surveillance, snooping and/or spying.

Option 3: The adversaries add relays for above purpose and compromise other relays for the above purpose simultaneously or otherwise.

If you consider option 2, your argument is not applicable at all. Multiple adversaries may have compromised many relays, some of the the relays maybe compromised by multiple adversaries. It is logical that these are relays with the largest bandwidth.

In your question you have mentioned at least three adversaries interested in attacking Tor, I suggest the numbers are at least in dozens and at least five of them are colluding (The five eyes, namely US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand). Looking at this scenario I see little comfort in concluding that, they will dilute each other significance. On the contrary, this collusion will significantly increase their significance. You should understand that at times even non-colluding adversaries do have a business dealings, and they may sell their information to the other adversaries for a price (not necessarily monetary price but sometimes for political, or tactical advantage and sometimes you scratch my back and I scratch your back situation). In conclusion, compromised relays by any adversary is a significant tribulation and there is no solace in which adversary is compromising which relay.

There are at least three distinct possibilities.

Option 1: The adversaries add relays for the purpose of surveillance, snooping and/or spying.

option 2: The adversaries compromise otherwise acceptable relays for the purpose of surveillance, snooping and/or spying.

Option 3: The adversaries add relays for above purpose and compromise other relays for the above purpose simultaneously or otherwise.

In your question you have mentioned at least three adversaries interested in attacking Tor, I suggest the numbers are at least in dozens and at least five of them are colluding (The five eyes namely US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand). Looking at this scenario I see little comfort in concluding that, they will dilute each other significance. On the contrary, this collusion will significantly increase their significance. Also when using option 2, even non colluding adversaries multiply their significance. You should understand that at times non-colluding adversaries do have a business dealings, and they may sell their information for a price.

There are at least three distinct possibilities.

Option 1: The adversaries add relays for the purpose of surveillance, snooping and/or spying.

option 2: The adversaries compromise otherwise acceptable relays for the purpose of surveillance, snooping and/or spying.

Option 3: The adversaries add relays for above purpose and compromise other relays for the above purpose simultaneously or otherwise.

In your question you have mentioned at least three adversaries interested in attacking Tor, I suggest the numbers are at least in dozens and at least five of them are colluding (The five eyes, namely US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand). Looking at this scenario I see little comfort in concluding that, they will dilute each other significance. On the contrary, this collusion will significantly increase their significance. Also when using option 2, even non colluding adversaries multiply their significance. You should understand that at times non-colluding adversaries do have a business dealings, and they may sell their information to the other adversaries for a price (not necessarily monetary price but sometimes for political, or tactical advantage and sometimes you scratch my back and I scratch your back situation).