Russian navy in decline spreads its itself thinner

Rowan Scarborough:

Russia’s boast that it plans to extend its naval forces to bases in Cuba, the Seychelles and Vietnam poses little strategic threat to U.S. interests in Latin America, the Indian Ocean or the Pacific, analysts say.

It is more a political move than a military one, as President Vladimir Putincontinues to contest American supremacy, particularly during the Syrian crisis.

The Russian fleet may number 300 ships, about the same as the U.S. Navy, but its aging warships are less advanced than America’s high-powered guided-missile cruisers and destroyers. The Kremlin owns only one operational aircraft carrier, as opposed to Washington’s 11 nuclear-powered carriers and strike groups that comprise what is called a “blue-water” navy able to operate far from home.

Moscow deploys few ships outside its waters, while the Pentagonstations a quarter of the fleet at sea at any one time.

“Russia is trying to punch above its weight in world affairs, trying to pretend it is a major world power when it is in fact a state in [a] declining strategic circumstance,” said James Russell, an instructor at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif.

“The declaration of wanting more navy bases, a throwback to the 1970s and 1980s, is just another example. The Soviets never had a real blue-water power-projection capability, and neither does Russia.”

... 

To add some text to the situation Russia finds itself in, it has a GDP that is smaller than that of the state of Texas.  Texas also does not have the expense of maintaining a decrepit fleet of ships and a bunch of nukes.  Russia does profit from corruption that sucks money out of the economy, but that tends to make it weaker rather than stronger.