Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Security Council and former president Dmitry Medvedev ridiculed U.S. President Donald Trump after he issued a so-called 50-day ultimatum to Russia and its allies who continue economic cooperation with Putin's regime. Medvedev called Trump's statements a decorative ultimatum and stressed that the U.S. president had disappointed a belligerent Europe. Indeed, the Russian capital did not pay much attention to the U.S. president's latest statements. Moreover, the Moscow stock exchange rose after Trump concluded his meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, to whom the statements were addressed.However, are Trump's statements really so safe for the Russian leadership? And should Medvedev, who has already refuted his statements several times after corresponding comments from American and Western politicians, as, incidentally, happened with Trump as well, really laugh at the American president?Fifty days is indeed a long time, allowing Russia to continue its offensive against Ukrainian positions without any serious problems, as well as to carry out systematic shelling of Ukrainian cities and towns, thus destroying Ukraine's military-industrial complex and forcing Ukrainian citizens to consider surrendering to Russia, which Putin continues to count on. But, on the other hand, Trump emphasizes that he will provide Ukraine with new weapons.Read also: Trump responds to China: “We will not let Ukraine lose”These weapons, of course, are intended to deter the Russian offensive, which already seems unrealistic given the position of the Russian armed forces on Ukrainian soil.The supply of new air defense systems to Ukraine also creates problems for further shelling of Ukrainian territory by Russian invaders. And now the Western media emphasize that the United States may allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russia with ATACMS missiles, which are already in service with the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Thus, numerous military and energy facilities in Russia may soon be set ablaze, which, of course, will create additional problems for the Russian economy, already exhausted by sanctions and war.Of course, one could argue that this economy has survived the most serious sanctions pressure from the West, and now Putin, in alliance with the People's Republic of China, can confidently look to the military future. But the promise of a 100% tariff for countries that continue to buy oil from Russia does create certain problems for the Russian energy complex.Russia remains a state whose budget is primarily linked to energy supplies. And any problems with such supplies reduce the capabilities of the Russian budget and Putin's plans for a long-term war with Ukraine.Prior to Trump's speech, the Russian leader's greatest ally was not even China, but time. It was the long-term war of attrition against Ukraine, as the Russian president reasoned, that would sooner or later put an end to the history of the neighboring state and allow him to annex Ukrainian territories to Russia as ordinary regions, which, in turn, would allow him to move on to restoring the borders of the former Soviet Union, which would become the borders of the new Russia. But now, when Russia may simply run out of money for this imperialist experiment of its second president, Putin will have to think about whether the fate of the Soviet Union awaits Russia.Soviet leaders were so caught up in the arms race with the U.S. and other Western countries that they did not notice how the history of their criminal, misanthropic state had come to an end. Although, I would like to remind you, the leaders of the West at that time, who were ready for further confrontation with the communist system, did not expect such an outcome either.It is obvious that Ronald Reagan, François Mitterrand, and Margaret Thatcher wanted coexistence with a more predictable Soviet Union, rather than the demise of the communist empire and the greatest crisis in its existence since the Bolsheviks' victory in 1917-1920. The same inglorious fate may await Putin and Medvedev's Russia.Donald Trump obviously wants to force the Russian president to compromise and strop military operations in Ukraine, and emphasizes that he is determined. But in reality, the American president is simply dragging the Russian leadership into a new arms race with the West and a struggle to prove that “no one will ever dictate anything to Russia.” Putin may choose to adopt the Brezhnev-Andropov tactics of dealing with the U.S. leadership. Continue to increase the pace of the offensive in Ukraine, shell Ukrainian territory, and ignore Trump's ultimatums, which the Kremlin considers decorative. The American president will continue to be perceived by Putin either as someone who can be easily manipulated, thereby creating favorable conditions for himself for the continuation of the war against Ukraine, which Putin hates, or simply ignored when Trump issues his warnings. Trump will continue to escalate his statements about Russia and actions to help Ukraine, hoping that sooner or later the Russian political leadership will realize the importance of compromise with Washington. But there will be no compromise. There will be an escalation of war and crisis in the post-Soviet space. Putin will look for Trump's weak spots not only when it comes to the Russian-Ukrainian war, but also when it comes to other regions of the world. Russia will increase its cooperation with Iran and North Korea to create new crises for the U.S., and Trump will respond to these challenges from Putin.Ultimately, the Russian economy may not be able to withstand this frantic pace of struggle, and during the terms of either Trump or his successor, a crisis will begin in the post-Soviet space that will be comparable to the crisis of the former Soviet Union. A crisis that could engulf not only Russia itself, but also other former Soviet republics that will be drawn into confrontation with Russia, like Ukraine, or remain in the shadow of its ambitions, like Belarus. In this situation, it will be very difficult to predict the outcome of such a crisis, just as it was difficult in the late 1980s and early 1990s to predict the outcome of the collapse of the Soviet Union.SourceAbout the author. Vitaly Portnikov, journalist, winner of the Shevchenko National Prize of Ukraine.The editorial team does not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.