These resources can be turned to other aspiring regional powers for the sake of creating a multi-polar world without America in charge — they use strength in numbers against the U.S. hegemon.

Iran is the most significant ally of this sort in the Middle East, and together the two countries are collaborating with the other major Middle East opponent of American/Israeli/Saudi power — Syria — in the theater at the center of this struggle today, the Syrian civil war.

Now, it is possible that Trump is simply an isolationist, a true “America First-er” as his sloganeering reference to anti-internationalist Nazi sympathizers of the World War II era would have it.

If that’s the case, then there is no contradiction between his desire to roll back U.S. interference in the region and Russia’s desire to minimize American imperial meddling in Russia’s backyard.

But how does Trump square this away with his hostility to Iran and his alliance with the most militant elements of Israeli foreign policy? This commitment goes deeper than words.

Trump’s nominee for national security advisor, Michael Flynn, was an Iran hawk whose former colleagues have publicly expressed worries that he will lead the United States to war with Iran. Trump has also named a hardline ambassador to Israel who is aligned with the most expansionist parties in the region, the ones most committed to conflict with Iran.

How does he follow the path signaled by these appointments, set down in his persistent threats against Iran, and at the same time collaborate with their most significant military and political ally?

It bears noting here that the United Staes has allies in the region, too — allies who pose existential threats to the Iranian and Syrian regimes. Israel, for one, serves as a proxy military force for U.S. and Western imperialism, striking blows when necessary to the anti-imperialist regimes in the area, or at least posing threats to each of them on terms we could not get away with politically.

Saudi Arabia, for another, has used its unique position as the host of the holiest sites in Islam and its tremendous oil wealth to carry out a protracted ideological project turning Sunni Arabs and other Sunni Muslims — a strong majority of the region — to a set of cultural and political commitments that undermine the movements most historically threatening to U.S. imperialism. Arab nationalism, anti-colonialism and communism, in particular.

Iran and Saudi Arabia are fighting at least two proxy wars against one another at the moment. First in Syria where the Saudis, the United States, the Gulf States and Turkey have been backing Sunni jihadist “rebels” fighting against the secular president Bashar Al Assad, Russia and Iran — but also in Yemen where the Saudis have been collaborating with U.S. forces to put down an Iran-supported Shi’a-led alliance resisting a Saudi-imposed government.

So there are a finite number of permutations for resolving the contradiction posed by varying relations between Russia and its allies — Iran in particular, but also Syria — and the United States and its allies — Israel and Saudi Arabia. Let’s take them one by one.

The easiest option would be for Trump and the United States to simply turn on Russia. Each of the last three U.S. presidents have done this. Pres. Bill Clinton was close to then-Russian president Boris Yeltsin but ended up at a skeptical distance from his replacement, Putin.

Pres. George W. Bush notoriously “looked into (Putin’s) eyes … and got a sense of his soul” and invited him to do cowboy shit on his Texas dude ranch.

Obama sought a “reset” with Russia then ended up with the Kremlin allegedly hacking his political party’s computers to ratfuck his preferred successor. If Trump flipped, it would be part of this trend.

But there has been no issue on which Trump has been as consistent as his defense of the Putin regime. Even his anti-immigration message has wavered more than this commitment to the Russian state, going so far as to drop his own running mate in the grease on the issue during a presidential debate.

Flipping on Russia would be easy, but it would have been easy before now — so why hasn’t he done it already?

There is no good, apparent answer for this. One possibility is that KGB-veteran Putin is using his asset recruiting skills to manipulate Trump, flattering him and playing into his overwhelming narcissism and so he cannot deal with Russia rationally.

Another, more sinister possibility is that Trump is somehow exposed to the Russians. We have no idea about the details of his complex and likely corrupt business dealings — he might be in a vulnerable financial position to Russian business interests, something alleged during the campaign.