Why is Russia no Longer a Superpower?

Russia strives to maintain the illusion of superpower status, but its growing inability to meet the fundamental standards of global leadership, from economic strength and political coherence to international influence and institutional appeal, reveals a power in decline.

Its claims to global hegemony appear less and less convincing, especially in light of its military aggression in Ukraine, growing political isolation, and economic decline. Nevertheless, many around the world still mistakenly attribute superpower characteristics to Moscow. Why did this happen – and what should be done about it?

The Illusion of Superpower Succession

After the collapse of the USSR, Russia inherited a huge nuclear arsenal, a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, spatial scale and the lingering inertia of an “imperial presence.” 

These factors allowed it to maintain the external facade of a superpower. However, over time, it became clear that these attributes, without substantive content, are only a simulacrum. At the same time, military power without an economic base turns into a risk, not an asset.

In fact, in many respects, today’s Russia is a “defensive empire” that tries to hold on to the remnants of influence through coercion rather than persuasion or appeal.

Russia’s economy is roughly the size of Spain’s, accounting for only about 2% of global GDP. The structure of its economy is extremely vulnerable: over 40% of its exports are oil and gas, i.e., “the economy of a gas station with nuclear weapons,” as John McCain once characterized it.

Sanctions imposed after 2014, and radically strengthened in 2022, have driven away foreign investors, created a shortage of technology, and triggered a massive outflow of intellectual capital. In 2023–2024, Russia spent up to a third of its budget on war, which means it was eating away at the future.

This is not the behavior of a superpower. It is the behavior of a country in agony, mobilizing its last resources to preserve its pseudo-imperial status.

The Putin regime has destroyed political competition, shut down independent media, and eliminated judicial independence. Since 2022, Russia has been officially classified as an authoritarian state according to the Democracy Index. 

Authoritarianism, when combined with a cult of war and systematic repression, cannot support sustainable development. Its only tools are fear and forced mobilization, and those are effective only temporarily.

The very concept of a superpower implies not only the ability to wage war but also to build peace. Russia, in contrast, is only capable of destruction. Russia has failed to offer its own ideological concept of the world, which, with all its reservations, the USSR did have. Whatever one’s attitude to the communist ideology of the USSR today, it still existed, and it was quite influential in the world and attractive to a large part of humanity in the past.

After all, Soviet communism was a universal ideology that claimed to be a means of changing all of humanity. Does Putin’s Russia have anything like that? Obviously, all they can offer humanity is an ethnically limited “Russian world” that goes no further than the idea of fencing Russia off from the rest of the world. They have nothing else to offer humanity.

The War in Ukraine as a “Test of Superpower”

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was the moment when the world had the opportunity to test Moscow’s real power. And Russia failed this test. The Kremlin failed to achieve any of its declared goals, lost tens of thousands of troops, engaged in a war of attrition, and lost the EU market. In this way, Russia exposed the gap between its superpower image and its actual capabilities.

As Finnish President Alexander Stubb emphasized in a conversation with U.S. President Donald Trump, “Russia is no longer a great power,” true superpowers do not build their power on blackmail and terror – they set the world’s rules, not break them.

Why does the world still perceive Russia as a superpower? This is due to several deeply rooted perceptions:

1. Nuclear weapons: with over 5,000 warheads, Russia remains a nuclear power that must be reckoned with.

2. Membership in the UN Security Council: Russia’s permanent seat allows it to block decisions and maintain symbolic influence.

3. The West’s imperial memory: many politicians still think in terms of the Cold War, where Moscow is the No. 1 threat.

4. Fear of escalation: The perception of Russia as unpredictable makes it paradoxically important.

This manufactured “reality of fear” allows Putin to manipulate Western hesitancy, essentially “laughing in the face of the West” by exploiting its reluctance to escalate confrontation. But this raises a crucial question: where is the line between bluff and real capability? 

In general, the case of Russia shows that the very concept of a “superpower” should be rethought. In the 21st century, military force and natural resources alone are no longer sufficient. 

Real power lies also in technology, alliances, cultural influence, and moral legitimacy. It is necessary to realize that Russia remains a regional threat, but not a global player. It can cause local disasters, but it is not capable of shaping the international order.

It is also necessary to deprive Russia of its symbolic status, i.e., exclusion from international organizations, denial of its “veto right” as the successor to the USSR, and less media attention to its propaganda. 

And most importantly, support alternatives, including Ukraine, which today embodies the power of freedom, innovation, and horizontal cooperation. These are the countries that should create the future world order.

A New Policy Toward Russia: Principles for the 21st Century

1. Russia is a revisionist state, but not a superpower. Twenty-first-century Russia is a revanchist country seeking to revise the international order established after the Cold War. However, its capabilities do not match the scale of its ambitions. Military power without an economic base, global alliances, and a positive image in the eyes of the world is a limited force, doomed to stagnation. Putin’s Russia may be a great power in terms of its arsenal, but it is small in terms of its future potential.

2. Nuclear weapons do not guarantee superpower status. A true superpower is not only a country that can destroy the world, but also one that can organize it. China and the United States compete through technology, innovation, trade, diplomacy, and cultural expansion. Russia avoids these areas, focusing only on the military threat. Yet true superpower status is about creating meaning, not just instilling fear.

3. Russia has limited foreign policy tools due to its aggression. Its policy of aggression, interference in the internal affairs of other states, information warfare, and nuclear blackmail have made Russia a toxic actor on the global stage. It has lost the West’s trust, severed economic ties with the EU and become increasingly dependent on China. At the same time, it has neither powerful allies nor effective soft power. The world does not want to stand beside Russia, and that is the ultimate verdict on its superpower ambitions.

4. The failure of the war in Ukraine is a historical marker of imperial decline. The invasion of Ukraine was an attempt to return to the nineteenth century, when territories were conquered with bayonets. However, the 21st century responded with drones, sanctions, alliances, and the resilience of democracy. Ukraine has survived. Meanwhile, Russia has demonstrated its strategic limitations, organizational inefficiency, and moral decay. This war will go down in history as the end of Russia’s dream of imperial revival.

5. It is time to revise the global perception of Russia’s role. The world’s perception of Russia as a superpower is an anachronism, an inertia of Cold War thinking. It is time for a reassessment. Russia is not a stabilizing force, but a destabilizing one that must be contained. Returning to a realistic vision will help to avoid the misguided policy of appeasement that Moscow so often exploits.

Can a superpower exist in the twenty-first century without ideological and economic dominance in the world? Can it exist without being a model or a benchmark for others, instead serving merely as an “instrument of intimidation”? These questions seem rhetorical.

It is time to stop treating Russia as a superpower that upholds global stability, and to recognize it for what it is: a local autocracy that destroys the very principles of the international order.

Petro Oleshchuk, political scientist, Ph.D, expert at the United Ukraine Think Tank