My interpretation is perhaps a little different: instead of Russia being weak, perhaps Russia, like America, does not have the means to dominate a people that refuses to be dominated. America's military power remains uncontested, but even with the power to obliterate armies in Iraq and Afghanistan, imposing a will upon people willing to kill and die to resist that will is impossible.

People can easily imagine a world without a Russian power, BUT imagining a powerful Russia is exceptionally useful - because tools and tactics that contain a smaller power like Russia could prove helpful elsewhere, esp. in the Pacific. The lessons learned so far suggest that it doesn't matter whether the leader is a comedian or a seasoned commander - but only that people refuse to surrender for some reason, and by refusing to surrender, what allies may enable them to fight on.