The man who created it. It became whimsy amounts to iron will. It seemed plausible. We took it to the beach, set it on fire and instantly our numbers tripled because a burning human form, if you put one up at the Republican National convention, the people would say, down in front, it would so compel, and it was so accessible. There wasnt a need to explain it and we havent explained it to this day. When we ask what that means, you have to achieve that through your engagement. Whats next with ukraine and larry harvey when we continue. Captioning sponsored by Rose Communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. We begin tonight with the ongoing crisis in ukraine. Tensions are high after russia and allied troops seize ukraine and military facilities in crimea. Earlier this week moscow approved a treaty engage the region to join russia. Thursday president obama announced further sanctions on russian officials and financial institutions. This is not our preferred outcome. The sanctions would not only have impact on the russian economy but disruptive to the global economy. However, russia must know further escalation will only isolate it further from the international community. Charlie russian authorities announced sanctionons u. S. Lawmakers and officials in response. Joining me is ian bremmer, president of eurasia group, and Stephen Cohen, president , and stephen sestanovich. He wrote the world from triewm ton obama. Pleased to have both of you. We just heard from the president and then we have the response from russia. Well, where we are today is that the administration is it trying to show that the first list of measures that it announced on monday, a few rather small number of people not particularly closely related to putin were given visa bands. Today theyre trying to show theyre really much more serious about it and theyve announce add number of measurers expanding the number of individuals who are sanctioned, giving the President Authority to introduce new measurers against targeted sectors of the russian economy, and looking forward to meetings next week in europe where the president will be meeting with other members of the g7 to formulate a broader response. Generally speaking this is a step forward where the American Government is kind of getting its act together showing it is taking this crisis seriously and is not being deflected by concerns about the Economic Impact to the global and american economies. Its trying to signal this is a very serious crisis. Charlie where are we, steve . I fear actually, i think that we are three steps from war with russia, two steps from a cuban missile crisis. Those two steps and both are being discussed in washington and moscow would involve as many advocate moving nato troops to the polish border. I dont know how serious but aircraft are already there and nato is moving troops around. If that thaps, putin would almost certainly move the 150,000 soldiers he was practicing a week ago and sent back to the barks into russia into south an eastern ukraine, that would be the cuban missile crisis and war would be one step away. Thats my snapshot. Theres a post script. There is, i am 100 certain, a way back and out of this through diplomacy. The russians have put a step forward, as far as i know, the americans havent responded. Charlie what is that proposal . I need a piece of paper. This is what the Russian Foreign ministry is saying. Russia wants, putin wants. In a nato expansion to ukraine and georgia, he wants a moderate government in kiev, kind of nonalign government without these people he calls neofascists, and a few are in that government. He wants a continued russianukrainian economic relationship because thats vital to russia and ukraine and he wants a federalized ukrainian constitution because that would give the pro russian people in ukraine some say. Now, let me just say briefly what he would give in return. Charlie that was my next question. Yes, i know. As ragan says, it takes two to tango. I personal cant tang olaf laugh putin would, in return, recognize the new kiev government. He doesnt recognize this government. He wont talk to them. Secondly, he would pledge not to inspire more separationism in ukraine because there are regions of ukraine that wouldnt mind joining russia and he, russia, would help ukrainian economy avoid the abyss on which they stand possibly by continuing to charlie and do you consider that proposal by the russian reasonable . I consider it a reasonable starting point. Now, we have originned that thats an offer. Now its our turn to say what we think about that. Its going to be hard to do, in part, because secretary kerry already said if the russians proceeded with annexation of crimea which today was voted in favor of and putin said would happen, that that is the end of diplomacy. Kerry needs to walk that back. Its unfortunate he said that. Yes. Speaking points all over the United States, kerry said all options are on the table. A couple days later president obama said no engagement of military excursions on the ground, wouldnt provide military support for the ukrainians and furthermore the ukrainians wouldnt want that. The sanctions are real and real in the sense they have Economic Impact. We will see major capital flight with oligarchs from holdings in the United States and europe and will move to other places. But they will not oppose putin. Putins popularity only increased through ukrainian crisis. The deal that stephen talked about being proffered doesnt include a move from crimea. Putin said its unsaleable for the russians to stay the n ukraine. While i do not believe were actually close to war with the russians because i think we have no interest in military escalation visavis russia, i do believe the likelihood of this becomes destabilizing significant. Charlie in the russians do certain kinds of things, there can be a nato response. Sure but i dont see the russians going on ukraine. I do think it is possible. I think that the russians find this Ukrainian Government unacceptable, they will certainly work to overturn it. The question is whether they will do so economically and diplomatically or. Charlie i was going to ask, steve, is that a reasonable position to have with respect to that government since the president was overthrown, the democratically elected president was overthrown in the manner that he was. Look, i think that 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. Were really talking ukraine is by far the single most Important National interest that the russian haves. A russia that has been in decline structurally for over 20 years, demographically, geographically, diplomatically, militarily, economically, and they put a real red line, not a dotted red line, they put a real red line on crimea and ukraine. Yeah, i think ian is right. Were 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 to be able to dictate the composition of ukraines government, the structure of ukraine, and its foreign policy. And a lot of the things you know, the devil is always in the details in diplomacy of this kind, but a lot of the specific provisions of putins proposal are extremely farreaching. Theyre not really just a federalization of ukraine which sounds innocuous, they come very close to the breakup of ukraine and that combined with fears about what putin is really after, given what hes done this week, is going to make it extremely difficult to for people to sit around the table and talk calmly about this. Charlie seems to me thats an interesting point to me, having listened to a lot of people around this table over the last few weeks on this, is it possible because of what you suggested because of the countrys economic well being that effective sanctions will influence him and cause him to either stop or pull back . Sadly, i dont think so. And i think this is a misjudgment on the part of the United States. I think that there are no reasonable sanctions that are feasible for the americans and europeans. Charlie achievable or feasible. No achievable, that we cant get there, to put the kind of pain on the russians to make a move. The interests are asymmetric, the level of importance of ukraine to putin is too great. Putin gave a speech this week to the upper house to have the parliament and seen as an historic speech all over russia, a speech that i would say a Strong Majority of russians have been waiting for a leader to give for 20 years from now, the belief that the United States does not have russias interests at heart, is willing to undermine and you finally have a leader whos willing to stand up and say absolutely no more. His popularity has only shot up since this ukraine crisis has started in the last two weeks. Charlie like putin or not, you have been saying that for ten years. 20. Charlie 20, right. I think you cant 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 toward russias borders which began under clinton and is now in the ball ticks on russias borders was going to eventually lead to Something Like this. Ian pointed out something very important and i think every american interested should read putins speech, its in english, and it tells you where mes coming from. Putin used the expression red line, and he has two, one georgia, one ukraine, for reasons, we crossed the red line in georgia in 2008 and there was a small war. He believes now, he may be wrong about this but he sees in this whole thing nato coming to ukraine and he believes we crossed a red line and what you got is what you got. Now, Steve Sestanovichs position, i understand, but if we were to deconstruct each thing steve said, that means either putin withdraws from crimea, kicks it out of the Russian Federation or there are no negotiations, and i maintain, if theres no negotiations, with all the tales in ukraine, prove violations every day, snipers, we dont know who they, are all the tails wagging the dog, we could get to war. We have to begin negotiations and it doesnt begin with putin, after what he did this week, saying, okay, never mind, i send crimea back to ukraine. Charlie steve . 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 that ian mentioned. The sanctions are really meant to symbolize western alarm. But 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 because it couldnt be sustained in ukraine itself. He sought an economic subordination of ukraine to russia, and 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 yanukovich. Yanukovich was ousted by unanimous vote of the entire Ukrainian Parliament including every Single Member at his party. Its a pretty legitimate government, actually. I think the problem we have now is not so much how to reverse crimeas status, just as in most to have the cold war in most of the cold war it wasnt about changing bulgarias status. The real issue is how to make ukraine succeed rather than having it dismembered by russia. Thats going to take a very ambitious and creative policy on the part of the west. Charlie the idea i assume youre talking about is ukraine would have its relationship with russia but also allowed to have a relationship with the e. U. Absolutely. Charlie two things, it would benefit everybody. Sure, and the new government in kiev is talking exactly that line. This week, Prime Minister yatsenyuk said a number of very important things about the future course he sees. He said, nato membership, not at all on the agenda, because thats a very divisive issue in ukraine. He also said the e. U. Is opening its market to us, and without any invidious measures that might be harmful to eastern ukraine, the russian economy, the new government is trying to find a way to unify the country, put the economy back on its feet to unit the society at a time when the russians are doing everything to create social tension, and i think theres just no way to describe russian policy as other than terribly threatening to the post cold war order, and i think the Ukrainian Government is, by contrast, acting much more calmly, responsively to try to keep the peace. Charlie one quick thing here. Do you believe that putin believes that the demonstrations leading to the overthrow of yanukovich who was aided and abetted by the United States. I dont know but heres what he does believe, that on february 21, the European UnionForeign Ministers signed an agreement with yanukovich that would have kept him in office till elections in december, gotten the protesters off the street and brought the process of some kind of reconciliation. That document, which russia didnt sign but signed off of i mean, it agreed with it was dead in the water twelve hours later and he feels that the fact that the United States and European Union did nothing to enforce that document which led to the charlie yeah. Indicates our complicity at some level. Charlie and some say deck at a time American Foreign policy. I dont want to implicate ian, he speaks eloquently for himself, but i would say the difference between your two steves is the difference between, i think, war and peace. In Steve Sestanovichs mind, its rust and putin who are responsible for this terrible mess from the git to the go. And i ask all of us at the table this question i mean, i was raised in kentucky, they taught us at school there are two sides to every story is there anything legitimate or true that russians have said or done in this crisis that putin said in that speech . If so, so much is true, thats where you begin to negotiate. But Steve Sestanovich doesnt have a word of legitimacy for anything that comes to russia, one last word, Henry Kissinger wrote, one of the great things he said, demonization of putin is not a policy, its an albye for not having a policy. Charlie he said it on the program. Good. Charlie steve, respond and ill come back to how you see putin and how Stephen Cohen thinks you see putin. Well, i dont think i should be the subject of this discussion. Charlie i know. Im happier to make putin the subject of this 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. And without demonizing him, i think you can say that every step of the way since then, his actions have escalated the crisis, have created anxietys both within russia and within ukraine and within among ukraines fab neighbors and throughout europe. The fact he has gained some popularity at home, to my mind, is not a real justification for deeply irresponsible policy. If Stephen Cohen wants to say whipping up the russian republic 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 that the countries that emerged out of the former soviet union have enjoyed amongst themselves and made it possible to keep the peace. Now the peace is threatened. But i think that is primarily the doing of one man. Charlie but the fact is putin has been demonized through this process. As Stephen Cohen said, there have been things putin said. Putin had blood on his hands, he was more than happy to support yanukovich when he was cracking down in ways that clearly lost his legitimacy in ukraine, but a deal was cut with the european Foreign Ministers, and the americans were happy to jump on that in ways that would have completely unacceptable to the administration if we had been on the other side. Lord knows our administrations over history have been willing to accept undemocratic things if they benefit us or our strategic interests. Leaving that assayed, what is going to happen now because Steve Sestanovich is right, the russians escalated every moment. Having said that, the Obama Administration escalated every moment, too. The fact that we dont know how far theyre willing to go doesnt mean both sides havent given as good as theyve gotten. The Obama Administration slapped new sanctions on today and within an hour the russians had sanctions back that were nip and tuck right with them. Furthermore the Russian Ministry said yesterday they were thinking of changing negotiations process in iraq. They are taking this very seriously and if the u. S. Continue to ratchet it up on something the russians think as legitimately in their backyard that they must address, the it continues. This is going to have real Eco