This claim is very interesting, and I personally like it. I may sound impopular, but I hoped for such a claim, even if I love my Russian Church.
I'll try and explain why I think it to be useful.
Since its beginnings, the Church tried to establish coryphei among the bishops: primi inter pares who might organize the church and grant the preservation of Orthodoxy/Catholicity. The Church of Rome, because of its role as imperial capital, for its dignity as the last see of saints Peter and Paul, and for its preservation of the deposit of faith up to that time, was chosen initially to be the head of all these coryphei, the original Pentarchy. When the capital was moved to Constantinople, this see became the second in dignity. If we acknowledge that, after Rome apostatized, the Holy Orthodox Church has remained without a true primate of the West, we must admit the Orthodox Church is really "defective" and thus Rome is essential to the Pentarchy and the Church entire - a thing I would never accept to acknowledge, personally. But if the church of Rome only had a CANONICAL primacy, as most Orthodox believe, her role as corypheus must have been absorbed in the second Patriarchate in rank, i.e. Constantinople the New Rome.
On the question of the many churches existent in the West from Diaspora, I think a new canonical reformation is necessary. The canons only took in consideration the indigenous churches of Western Europe, and not the Americas, or even the immigrant communities of diaspora in Western Europe after a 900 years of Orthodox absence from the Western countries. I still hope in the constitution of independent inter-ethnic autocephalous churches in America and in Europe, where all ethnical groups are ruled by their own primate and, at the same time, a Patriarch be appointed from the Greek Orthodox Church to serve as local coryphei under the omophorion of the EP. This would preserve unity in the West. Also, I hope for the canonical transfer of the Eastern European churches under the omophorion of the MP, considering that Moscow has founded many of these churches, or that the same Moscow See is the historical heir of the archbishopric in Kiev, and for the recognition of Moscow as a Great Patriarchate, fifth in rank after Jerusalem, to rebuilt the lost Pentarchy.The re-distribution of the Patriarchates according to their geographical jurisdictions in a full respect of the ethnic traditions, the re-unification under a unique calendar (I think that a field for discussion and agreement is still possible here, despite all hatred and divisions), and a definitive take on the "ecumenicity" of synods such as the IV and V councils of Constantinople or the Pan-Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem would be the true problems a future Pan-Orthodox Council should try to solve to preserve church unity. I pray for this to happen as soon as possible, before modernism might overcome the church and bring apostasy in her at the coming of Antichrist.
In Christ, Alex