From our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. The ongoing crisis in ukraine. Tensions are high after russia and allied troops seize Ukrainian Military facilities in crimea. Moscow approved a treaty enabling the region to join russia. President obama announced further sanctions on russian officials and financial institutions. This is not our preferred outcome. Sanctions would not only have a Significant Impact on the russian economy, but could be disruptive to the global economy. Russia must know that further escalation will only isolate it further from the international community. Russia has announced sanctions on u. S. Officials in response. I am joined by the president of eurasia group, and the author of soviet fates and lost alternatives, from stalinism to the new cold war. And from washington, a professor at Columbia University and senior fellow at the council on foreign relations. I am pleased to have each of them on this program. Give me a snapshot of where we are today. We just heard from the president. We had the response from russia. Where we are today is that the administration is trying to show that the first list of measures that it announced on monday a few a rather small number of people, not particularly closely related to putin were given visa bans. Today, they are trying to show they are much more serious about it. They have announced a number of measures expanding the number of individuals who are sanctioned, giving the president the authority to target sectors of the russian economy, and looking forward to meetings next week in europe, when the president will be working with other members of the g7 to formulate a broader response. Broadly speaking, this is a step forward in which the American Government is trying to get its act together, showing it is taking the crisis seriously and is not being deflected to the global and american economies. It is trying to signal this is a very serious crisis. I fear actually, i think that we are three steps from war with russia. Two steps from a cuban missile crisis. Those two steps, both been discussed in washington and russia, would involve moving nato troops to the polish and west ukrainian border. I do not know how serious those discussions are, only that aircraft are already there and nato is moving troops around. If it happens, putin almost certainly would move those 150,000 soldiers he was practicing a week ago and sent back to the barracks inside russia into south and eastern ukraine. That would be the cuban missile crisis, and war would be one step away. There is, i am one hundred percent certain, a way out of this through diplomacy. The russians have put a proposal forward. So far as i know, the americans have not responded. What is that proposal . I need a piece of paper, because it is complicated. I thought about it, coming down. This is what the Russian Foreign ministry is saying. In the nato expansion to ukraine and georgia, he wants a moderate government in kiev, without the people he calls neofascists, and if you are there in that government. He wants to continue a russianukrainian economic relationship. And he wants to federalize the ukrainian constitution. That would give the prorussia people in ukraine some say. But he would give in return that was that was my next question. It takes two to tango, although i personally cannot tango. Putin would in return recognize the new kiev government. He does not recognize this government. Secondly, he would pledge not to inspire more separatism in ukraine. And russia would help ukraine avoid the abyss in which they stand, possibly by continuing to provide discounted national resources. Do you consider it reasonable . I consider it a reasonable starting point. We have an agenda, and we have to think about it. It will be hard to do because secretary kerry already said if the russians proceed with annexation of crimea, as putin said was going to happen, that that was the end of diplomacy. He needs to walk that back. Speaking points from the United States have been all over the place. John kerry said that all options were on the table. A couple days later, obama says there will not be any engagement of military excursions on the ground in ukraine. He is not going to provide military support for the ukrainians, and the ukrainians would not want that. These sanctions are real. As of today, they are real. They have economic impact. We will now see major capital flight from russian oligarchs, with holdings in the United States and europe. They will move to other places. But they will not oppose putin. His popularity has only increased through this ukrainian crisis. The deal steve mentioned does not involve any agreement from crimea. The americans have said it is unacceptable for the russians to stay in crimea. For the russians, the current Ukrainian Government is illegitimate. That is a chasm. I do not believe we are close to a war with russia. We do not want military escalation. I do think the likelihood this becomes destabilizing is significant. If russians do certain kinds of things, there could be a nato response. Sure, but i do not see this going beyond ukraine. I think the russians find this Ukrainian Government unacceptable. They will work to overturn it. The question is whether they will do so economically and diplomatically is that a reasonable position with respect to that government, since the president was overthrown, the democratically elected president , in the manner he was . There are no good legal arguments for the americans on the Ukrainian Government overthrow. There are no good legal arguments for the russians on the crimean referendum. What we are really talking about is that ukraine is by far the single most importing National Interest the russians have, a russia that has been in decline structurally for over 20 years, demographically, geographically, militarily, economically. They put a real red line on crimea and ukraine. I think ian is right. We are not on the brink of war, but we are at a very dangerous moment, arguably the most dangerous moment since the end of the cold war, because the russians have begun to dismantle their biggest neighbor. And that is a drastic step that has alarmed all european governments, and makes it extremely hard to consider real diplomacy with president putin. Whatever you think of his proposal. Putin has kind of cast himself as an international outlaw, and that makes it very, very difficult to just sit down at the table calmly and look at individual proposals. Broadly speaking about their proposal, the big problem is understanding whether or not what the russian aim is is to be able to dictate the composition of ukraines government, the structure of ukraine, and its foreign policy. The devil is always in the details in diplomacy of this kind, but a lot of the specific provisions are extremely farreaching. They are not really just the federalization of ukraine, which sounds sort of innocuous. They come very close to the breakup of ukraine. That, combined with fears about what putin is really after, given what he has done this week, is going to make it extremely difficult for people to sit around the table and talk calmly about this. That is an interesting point to me, having listened to lots of people at this table in the last two or three weeks on this. Is it possible, because of his own economic wellbeing not his, but the countrys that effective sanctions will influence him and cause them to either stop or pull back . I do not think so. I think this is a misjudgment on the part of the United States. There are no reasonable sanctions that are achievable. We cannot get there. To put the kind of pain on the russians that would make them move, the interests are asymmetric. The level of importance of ukraine to putin is too great. Who didnt give a speech this week to the upper house of the parliament, and it was seen as an historic speech all over russia. I would say a Strong Majority of russians have been waiting for a leader to give the speech for 20 years now. The belief that the United States does not have russias interests at heart, is willing to undermine, is willing to defend a straight. You finally have a leader who is willing to stand up and say, absolutely no more. His popularity has only shot up since the ukrainian crisis started. You have been saying that for 10 years. 20. I think you cannot get out of a bad place unless you know how you got in. I have been arguing since the 90s that the constant expansion of nato to the russian borders, which is now in the baltics, was going to eventually lead to Something Like this. Ian pointed out something important. Read putins speech. You can disagree with it, but it tells you where he is coming from. He used the expression red line. One is georgia and one is ukraine. For geopolitical and historical reasons, we crossed the red line in georgia in 2008, and there was a small war. He believes he may be wrong about this, but he sees the nato coming to ukraine and believes we have crossed a red line. What you got is what you got. Steves position i understand. But if we were to deconstruct each thing steve said, that means that either putin withdraws from crimea or there are no negotiations. I maintain there are no negotiations with all of the provocations every day snipers, the tail wagging the dog we could get to war. We have to begin negotiations. It does not begin with putin, after what he did this week, saying nevermind, i sent crimea back to ukraine. I agree that getting crimeas status changed is not the primary focus of policy right now. And sanctions are not going to do it, for exactly the reason ian mentioned. The sanctions are really meant to symbolize western alarm. Steve is right also that we need to know how we got into this crisis. How we got into it is that putin had a strategy for bringing ukraine into his orbit, and it blew up in his face. It could not be sustained in ukraine itself. He sought an economic subordination of ukraine to russia. The only way in which he thought you could control the popular response there was by a bloody crackdown, which brought down his agent, president yanukovych, who was ousted by unanimous vote of the entire ukrainian parliament, including every Single Member of his party. It is a pretty legitimate government, actually. The problem we have now is not so much how to reverse crimea status. Just as most of the cold war was not about changing bulgarias status. The real issue is how to make ukraine succeed, rather than have it dismembered by russia. That is going to take a very ambitious and creative policy on the part of the west. The idea i assume you are talking about is that ukraine would a relationship with russia, but also the eu. Those things could benefit everybody. Sure, and the new government in kiev is talking exactly that line. This week, the Prime Minister said a number of very important things about the future course he sees. It is a very divisive issue in ukraine. He said, the eu is getting his market to us, and without any invidious measures that might be harmful to eastern ukraine, to the russian economy, the new government is trying to find a way to unify the country, to put the economy back on its feet, to unite the society at a time when the russians are doing everything to create social tension. I think there is no way to describe russian policy as other than terribly threatening to the postcold war order. I think the Ukrainian Government, by contrast, is acting much more calmly and responsibly to try to keep the peace. One quick thing. Do you believe that putin believes that the demonstrations leading to the overthrow of yanukovych was aided and abetted by the United States . I do not know, but here is what he does believe. That on february 21, the European Union foreign minister signed an agreement with yanukovych that would have kept him in office, gotten protesters off the street, and brought a process of reconciliation. That document, which russia did not sign, was dead in the water 12 hours later. He feels the fact that the United States and European Union did nothing to enforce that document, which led to this, indicates our complicity. And indicates on some level a failure of American Foreign policy. Here is the problem. I do not want to implicate ian. He speaks for himself. I would say the difference between the two steves is the difference between war and peace. In his mind, it is russia and putin that are responsible for this mess. I ask you this question. I was raised in kentucky, and they taught us there are two sides to every story. Is there anything true and legitimate than the russians have said or done in this crisis, including what putin said in that speech . If there is only that much that is true, that is where you begin to negotiate. But steve does not have a word of legitimacy for anything that came from russia. Look at what Henry Kissinger wrote. It was one of the great things he ever said. Demonization of putin is not policy. It is an alibi for not having a policy. Steve, do you want to respond to that, and then i will come back to how you see putin and how steve cohen things you see putin . [laughter] putin . I do not think i should be the subject of this discussion. I am happier to make putin the subject of the conversation. I think putin had every opportunity to respond to the change of government in ukraine in a way that kept passions calm, that created an opportunity for multiple interests to be served, and to avoid a crisis. Without demonizing him, i think you can say that every step of the way since then, his actions have escalated the crisis, have created anxieties within russia, within ukraine, and among ukraines neighbors and throughout europe. The fact that he has gained some popularity at home, to my mind, is not a real justification for deeply irresponsible policy. If steve wants to say that whipping up the russian public makes what he says true, fine. But really, read the speech carefully. The speech is a kind of justification for a very farreaching overthrow of stable arrangements with the countries that emerged out of the former soviet union, enjoyed amongst themselves, which made it possible to keep the peace. Now, the peace is threatened. I think that is primarily the doing of one man. The fact that putin has been demonized through this process putin has blood on his hands. He was more than happy to support yanukovych as he was cracking down in ways that reduced his legitimacy. The americans were very happy to jump on that immediately, in ways that would have been completely unacceptable to anyone in the u. S. Administration if we had been on the other side. Lord knows we have been able to support antidemocratic things if we have a strategic interest. Leaving all of that aside, what is going to happen now . The russians have escalated every moment. Having said that, the Obama Administration has escalated every moment. The fact that we do not know where they are willing to go does not mean both sides have not given as good as they got. Within an hour of new sanctions, the russians had sanctions back that were nip and tuck. The Russian Foreign ministry came out yesterday and said they were considering changing their engagement in the negotiations process on iran. They have taken this very seriously. If the u. S. Is going to continue to ratchet up as the russians look at something which they consider to be in their backyard, an illegitimate government, the escalation is going to continue. Not only will we have economic pain that will go further beyond the couple of individual billionaires and folks that its their real estate it will have real economic impact. We also will have a russia that will be geopolitically dangerous and destructive everywhere they happen to have influence. That is not a new cold war. China is not involved. China is not going to support them. The most important thing that gives us reason for optimism about a global event is, the chinese have abstained. They have said virtually nothing you can read anything into. They do not want to be attached to the russians or americans. Leave them alone. In terms of anywhere russia has influence iran, syria, around their borders, and some of the countries that could be destabilized, like poland and northeast estonia clearly, we are going to have some instability. Do you not think this could lead to war . I think that if you talk about trade war, absolutely. If you talk about capital flows isnt it more likely to have a significant detrimental impact on the russian economy, and pressure on them . Russia is weak, but not ready to collapse. This is not egypt. This is not ukraine, begging for cash. This is a guy that was prepared to take 15 billion and write a check to the ukrainians. The russian people are not doing incredibly well, but there is growth. The fact that they are a shadow of what they were 20 years ago does not mean we can push the guy into oblivion. Putin is not going down. This is the same guy that was prepared to allow pussy riot to be freed from prison because they were not a threat to him domestically. He should not underestimate the capabilities of someone who believes we are trying to strip away his singular most appropriate asset. Steve sent that americans need to read a speech from a world leader who fundamentally disagrees with us and does not sugarcoat it. We have too many people out there that disagree with us and do sugarcoat it. You are speaking to the converted when you say people ought to read speeches. I think people put in speech what they intend to say. So, where are we going to go . Let us try to move it ahead a little bit. I agree completely with ian that american diplomacy has not performed well. Statements were said that are regrettable. Now, you have an additional problem. That is true with syria too. Putin personally does not trust president obama. He thinks he is irresolute, has a short attention span, and goes back on agreements. It is wellknown known in the russian establishment that he does not feel russia has come forward. He talks on the phone all the time. God knows. There are two hours here, another here. He must like it. I am going to sharpen the focus. Putin does trust Angela Merkel. She speaks russian. He speaks german. She is in a complicated and difficult position.