Calling it semantics glosses over some realities. Russia’s GDP is roughly 1/10th that of the United States - the size of the US economy and the dominance of the US dollar as a reserve currency have arguably been stronger levers of power. Russia, for all its nuclear and military ability, does not exert anything like the economic power the US does. There’s more to “power” than just guns, rockets and espionage.

Yes, Russia is far less rich. But the superior might and reach of the US (or EU or NATO) tends to be to leveraged to overthrow countries that are much weaker, such as Libya. Meanwhile Russia's expansion into Crimea has only been met with sanctions, and they have carved out a growing sphere of influence in Syria by helping Assad turn the tide in the civil war.

That's why I called it semantics. With nuclear weapons and the logistical capability to deploy them, asymmetric economic power doesn't matter as much.