Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Russian Parliament Votes Authorization for Russia President to Send Troops into Crimea; Russia Recalls Ambassador to U.S.; California Experiencing Severe Storms

Aired March 01, 2014 - 10:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

CHRISTI PAUL, CNN ANCHOR: So glad to have you with us. I'm Christi Paul.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Victor Blackwell. It is 10:00 in the east, 7:00 on the west coast. You are in the CNN Newsroom. And we are beginning this morning with breaking news out of Russia. We have a live look here for you at pictures from the Russian parliament. It is just unanimously approved President Vladimir Putin's request to send Russian forces into Ukraine.

PAUL: Want to get the latest from CNN's Frederik Pleitgen in Moscow. Fred, what are you hearing?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Christi, a very significant vote that happened there in the upper house of Russian parliament. The vote, as you said, was unanimous, 89 of them for the motion, zero against.

The big question now, Vladimir Putin has the authority to send Russian forces into Ukraine. The big question now is, is this something they have done in retrospect or are the Russians going to start sending forces right now? As you know, there have been reports in the past I would say 18 to 24 hours, especially from the Ukrainian government, who have said the Russians have already flown forces into the Crimea, into southern Ukraine, which is the predominantly Russian territory of that country. They talk of up to 2,000 forces potentially, even up to 6,000 forces that might already be on the ground there.

And also, the regional government there which is also pro-Russian, has said that Russian forces that are part of a military base that Russia has in that region anyway are already helping them secure government buildings in the main town, the capital of the Crimea. The big question now is, is this happening in retrospect or will we see a big push of Russian forces move towards Ukraine?

BLACKWELL: Of course, this comes just hours after, maybe 18 hours after President Obama warned Russia against military intervention in Ukraine. Where do we foresee this going in the next couple of steps? I'm not asking you to pull out a crystal ball here, but the president's drawn sort of, without using the phrase, a red line, and it seems that Russia is prepared to cross it. PLEITGEN: Yes. The president very much in danger of walking, if you will, another red line trap, sort of similar to the Syria chemical weapons complex, if we remember that. It's very difficult to tell. You're absolutely right. We're trying to pull out that crystal ball because anyone who would have told you five days ago that we would be where we are now in this conflict, you would have thought that he was crazy. It's so fast-moving and unpredictable at this point in time.

What Russian politicians are talking about, though, Victor, is they are talking about a very limited force that could be put on the ground there. As I've said, some already think that 2,000 additional Russian forces might have already been placed on the ground. But certainly the vibe we're getting here from Moscow is this is supposed to be a very limited operation. It's unclear how long it's supposed to take, unclear how many soldiers are supposed to participate.

But we also know that the Russians are very much in a position to move forces into Ukraine because they have a gigantic military exercise going on right next door that they started off right after Viktor Yanukovych, then the pro-Russian president of Ukraine, was ousted. It involves some 150,000 soldiers, 880 tanks, and 120 helicopters. So they have a lot of assets close to the border. They can move them very quickly if they wanted to. The question is, are they going to do that or do they already have what they feel they need on the ground to do the job they want to do, which they claim is securing the area, and they say is stabilizing the area. Of course, the Ukrainian government has a very different view. They call all of this illegal. They say it's a breach of their sovereignty and they are calling on Russia to call its forces back.

PAUL: Fred Pleitgen in Moscow, thank you so much, Fred. We appreciate it.

The White House doesn't have a lot of options for tackling this crisis, necessarily.

BLACKWELL: President Obama said any meddling would have costs, but we won't be starting a war with Russia, nor did the White House kind of detail what those costs might be. So what will the White House and Pentagon do while this goes on?

PAUL: CNN Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr joining us by phone from Washington. Barbara, thank you for being with us. How's the Pentagon handling this latest information we're getting?

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, I have to tell you, Christi, for now the Pentagon very deliberately is staying very quiet about this, because, frankly, there is no U.S. military option, and the administration is making quite clear it doesn't want to put any U.S. military face on any of this.

It's going to be those diplomatic, economic, financial options that the administration is going to go after. But that is not to say that U.S. military, the U.S. intelligence community, isn't watching this minute by minute, because they are going to be watching what the Russian military tactics are to try and figure out what the Russians are really up to. They are going to be looking for the Russians to establish supply lines, airfields that they can control, rail lines they can control, because if they want to move into Ukraine, into Crimea, in a larger, more significant way, that is something that the Russians will have to take some time to do, put a lot of man power on the ground and resupply it. And that's really an extended military operation. So there are a lot of signals the U.S. will be watching for to figure out where this is going next.

BLACKWELL: So we have seen these troops in Sebastopol there in the Crimean region. Our Diana Magnay is in that region said she spoke with one of those troops and he identified himself as Russian. If fighting starts between those in the Ukraine near Kiev who want to identify with the west and the Crimean region and Russian troops who want to stay with Russia or return to the Russian Federation, first, what's the likelihood of that? And what would then be the U.S. response? There has to be some response more than there will be costs.

STARR: Yes. Well, you know, that is the big question right now. Look, it would be just disastrous of course for the people of Ukraine, the people of Crimea and for stability in that region of Europe. Can NATO step in diplomatically? There is talk about the U.N. Security Council. But of course, Russia can veto that.

Somebody, I think most people believe that the road to solving this goes, you know, right to what Vladimir Putin has in mind. It's been to some very large extent his call. But for the Russian military, there would also be a military cost to an extended, large, significant operation. As they would move through various areas of Ukraine, they will find people who do not support them. And we have seen in so many countries in recent years how rapidly basically insurgencies can break out. People band together when they have forces in their country that they don't like, outside forces. No reason to think that wouldn't start happening in Ukraine as well. So you know, I think that's the case the U.S. is trying to make. This could escalate so significantly, so quickly, and nobody wants to see that happen.

PAUL: Barbara Starr, thank you so much for walking us through what's happening in Washington. We appreciate it.

BLACKWELL: The Russian parliament unanimous vote approving the use of military force in Ukraine, that's the latest development in this breaking news. And it comes just hours, as we said, after the White House warned Russia to pull back. President Obama said there will be consequences if Russia uses military force.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, (D) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We are now deeply concerned by reports of military movements taken by the Russian Federation inside of Ukraine. Russia has a historic relationship with Ukraine, including cultural and economic ties, and a military facility in Crimea. But any violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity would be deeply destabilizing. The United States will stand with the international community in affirming that there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine. (END VIDEO CLIP)

PAUL: So let's talk about this with CNN senior political analyst David Gergen. David, thank you for being with us. We know parliament has approved Putin's request for military force now in Ukraine. Does it seem he's purposely defying Obama and the U.S.?

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Absolutely. It's a thumb in the eye. Within 24 hours after the president issued a warning, President Putin has gone and gotten authorization to use force. It doesn't mean he will, but it's a very provocative act.

And while it's wise for the Pentagon to keep a low profile in all of this, as Barbara Starr just reported, this is a moment when the White House has to be mobilizing the international community, especially our main co-partner here, Angela Merkel in Germany, but others in western Europe, to make it very clear to Mr. Putin that if he does move like this, there are going to be consequences, starting with economic consequences, and we need to start laying those out pretty darned fast.

BLACKWELL: So let me ask you this. I have asked this question of others from other angles viewing this breaking news. Is there any scenario in which you see that the Crimean region which wants to, many of the people who live there have an affinity towards Russia, will be folded into the Russian Federation and what's left will become Ukraine? Legally, beyond just, you know, what we're seeing now, the Crimean region will move back into the Russian federation?

GERGEN: I think that's not only possible but likely. That's a scenario we seem to be seeing the early stages of. As you know, there is a vote now scheduled and Ukraine on March 30th that they can establish a breakaway state. Whether it will be recognized by the government in Kiev is a different question. But the Russians will be able to claim and Crimeans will be able to claim look, there are such votes taking place in the west. There's a vote by Scotland coming up to establish an independent state. So they can claim there's a lot of precedent.

But I think the larger issue is this now. The president has two major I think objectives here. One is to ensure that international law and norms are respected and that is you don't invade the sovereignty of another country, which is where the Russians are perilously close to doing. The other is his own reputation. There is a perception, fairly or not, that President Putin has out-muscled him on more than one occasion, with regard to Edward Snowden, giving him asylum in effect, putting a thumb in the eye of the United States, and also then on Syria.

And the president does not want to look as if he's issued yet another red line, yet another warning, and then nothing happens. As one expert put it the other day, you can't bring a baguette into a knife fight. And Putin is carrying a knife.

PAUL: OK. David Gergen, stick with us. We have more questions for you. We have to take a quick break. If you're just joining us, we are covering the breaking news out of Russia this morning where the Russian parliament has just approved the use of military force in Ukraine. So much more ahead with our experts and reporters in the region. Stay close.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLACKWELL: Welcome back to CNN Newsroom. If you're just joining us, we are covering the breaking news out of Russia. Earlier this morning, President Vladimir Putin asked parliament to approve use of military force in Ukraine and have just unanimously approved that use of force. On the phone with us, we have chief national security correspondent Jim Sciutto. Jim, what is this very quick vote signal to you?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (via translator): I think it's a Russians slow rolling an invasion of sovereign Ukrainian territory, and in direct defiance of repeated public and stern warnings from U.S. officials ranging from Secretary Kerry, Secretary Hagel, right up to the top, right up to the president. You saw his comments yesterday.

It is a sobering development. The fact is U.S. officials were already telling us yesterday that those massed troops on the ground as of yesterday in and around Crimea were Russian. So now you have a public in effect acknowledgment from the Russian government that the president wants to send troops in there, this authorization.

I think the other point is that you can see this as an intelligence failure by the U.S. Officials had been telling us in the last 48, 72 hours that it was their assessment that the Russians would not go in, and here you have it happening. It is not the way they did it in Georgia in 2008. You remember when Russia sent troops into the country of Georgia in 2008 in a more sort of visible, tangible invasion, tanks rolling across the border. You don't have tanks rolling across the border but you do have a public authorization of force and more of maybe you can call it a stealth invasion, perhaps. You have the helicopters coming in, the troops so far without insignias on their uniform.

But this is a very sobering development, and it goes right up against very public policy of the U.S. not to do this.

PAUL: So Jim, let me ask you real quickly, this has happened so fast, just in the last, what, hour, hour and a half at this point. How quickly will we hear from the president, do you think?

SCIUTTO: It's a good question. I think I'm certainly waiting for that. Yesterday's announcement came with very little warning. I think we were hearing about 15 minutes before it happened. So if you do hear from the president or other senior U.S. officials, that will happen very quickly as well.

PAUL: Jim Sciutto, we appreciate your input. Thank you very much.

SCIUTTO: Thank you. BLACKWELL: Let's bring back David Gergen with us as we continue this conversation of the Russian parliament's decision to approve President Putin's request to send troops into the Ukraine. I've got this report here of several thousand pro-Russia protesters rallying in an eastern Ukrainian city and activists saying, this is a quote, "Our territory should become part of what used to be the Soviet Union. That is what we demand and that's why we're here." How soon could we see potentially what we saw in independence square in Kiev in the Crimean region there in Sebastopol?

GERGEN: I think we have already seen the parliament and the governmental buildings and the Crimean area taken over by these pro- Russian forces, and I think we could see, you know, I think what's unfolding is a very clear attempt to grab the Crimea out of this.

What President Putin is looking for is in effect a second best solution. He wanted all of Ukraine in his orbit. He wanted to break them away from the Europeans, and this is second best for him. But he's doing it in such a way that it's coming perilously close to drawing in the international community.

I think one of the things that the Americans must do now, the U.S. government must do, is to caution Kiev, don't fall into the trap of sending troops in to try to save the Crimean. That will bring the Russian troops in. That's what did happen in Georgia six years ago, that, in effect, the Russians laid a trap.

They haven't gone in yet. There has been no large invasion yet. But it could invite Kiev to use counterforce in order to protect the Crimea, and that will then justify the Russians to go in. We want to avoid that.

That's why I think this is an extremely complicated but extraordinarily important that the west act quickly. It is Putin who keeps acting quickly and we keep being a little hesitant, little uncertain of where we're going. And we need to pull our act together here and make it clear that there are consequences and spell out some of those starting with the economic. There may be bigger consequences. John McCain, for example, is more hawkish on this. He wants to go immediately to military type action, not troops on the ground, but military type actions, bringing in Georgia and NATO and the rest. I think the president is not going to do that, but I do think he's got to make it clear, economic sanctions will follow and there are going to be tough things that will happen.

PAUL: David, let me ask you if there are any questions as we try to assess the motives here of Putin. When I was reading what the request that he gave to the Kremlin, he said he was asking for forces of the Russian federation on Ukraine territory until normalization of that political situation in that area. Are there fears at all that he doesn't just have his sights on the Crimean area but perhaps to push past that border as well further into Ukraine?

GERGEN: I think there are some legitimate fears that he would want to go and move into eastern Ukraine, not western, which is very pro- European, pro-west, but that eastern part of that country, which the previous government, the government that has been ousted, was elected from. They have a lot of votes in there and they have a lot of support, a lot of Russian-speaking ethnic people there. So yes, I think he does have his sights on something bigger.

And we have to start with the proposition that Mr. Putin is not like some western democratically elected leader. He's former KGB and is a thug. He is anyplace with trenchant. He has a view of power. That's what's important to him. He's trying to save the honor of what he sees as the former USSR, the former Kremlin, and he's emerging as a strong guy. He plays by somewhat different rules than we do, and we have to stop him before he keeps moving like this.

PAUL: David Gergen, thank you so much for all of your insight. Good to have you here.

GERGEN: Thank you.

BLACKWELL: If you're just joining us, we are covering the breaking news out of Russia this morning. Russian parliament has just approved the use of military force in Ukraine. We have much more from our experts and our reporters there in the region still ahead. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLACKWELL: California has gone from no rain now to way too much rain. The state is getting torrential downpours leading to dangerous mud slides. Look at this. It desperately needs the rain, of course, after what is the worst drought in 100 years.

PAUL: Yes, but that's what happens when it gets inundated with water like that. The ground's so dry and some areas are getting as much as six inches of rain, and that causes mud slides and flooding. Let's get to meteorologist Karen Maginnis in our severe weather center here at CNN. So will they get a really big drenching today?

KAREN MAGINNIS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: It looks like this next 24 hours is when the bulk of the rainfall will materialize, but it could come down heavy and hard, bring down trees and power lines like we have seen all the way from San Francisco Bay Area. We don't talk a lot about that because we have been so focused on what's happening this weekend in southern California, but San Francisco saw record rainfall totals in the past 24 hours.

And for Phoenix, they are looking at the first rainfall that they've seen in 70 days. But this is not where this system is. But by the way, it looks like once this moves through, it's going to be a pretty dry spell at least for the next four or five days, but it's going to take another 24 to 36 hours for that to materialize. This will gather strength across the interior west and starting for tomorrow in the Midwest, then go into the Ohio River Valley, then to the northeast by Monday, winter is not giving up just yet. More snow is in the forecast, New York City could see four to eight inches on the way. Victor, Christie?

PAUL: Karen, thank you very much. Still to come in Newsroom, we have breaking news this morning out of Russia. The parliament there voting to use military force in Ukraine.

BLACKWELL: We will take you to the region next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLACKWELL: Breaking news right now in the CNN Newsroom. Russia's parliament gives President Vladimir Putin the green light to send troops into Ukraine's Crimea region. We have live pictures here. This is Russia's parliament. The lawmakers unanimously approved Mr. Putin's request for troops just a short time ago.

PAUL: And Ukraine says thousands of Russian troops have already moved into Crimea and it wants them out. CNN's Ian Lee joins us from the Ukrainian capital of Kiev. What's the reaction you're hearing at this hour?

IAN LEE, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Christi, we actually just got word from the officials here in Kiev, and they said that this move by the Russian parliament is a direct aggression toward the sovereignty of Ukraine. And these are words that we have heard over the past couple of days, yesterday as well, saying that the Russian movements into the Crimea is direct aggression and occupation of the area. These words seem to be falling on deaf ears when it comes to Moscow.

But I want to take you away from Crimea for a second. This, what we're seeing there, seems to have emboldened other parts of the east of Ukraine. We're looking at a place, the second largest city, Kharkov. We are seeing pro-Russian supporters, protesters, squaring off with pro-west, pro-European protesters. And 68 people have been injured and those clashes when pro-Russian protesters tried to take an administration building there in that city. Now, this area has been traditionally a more Russian-aligned area, Russian-aligned city. They have close economic ties. What we're also seeing in another city, we're hearing that pro-Russian protesters are also taking to the streets there. So really, what we're seeing starting in the Crimea seems to be spreading to other parts of eastern Ukraine.

BLACKWELL: Ian Lee for us in Kiev. Ian, continue to watch that and we'll check back. Thank you.

Just yesterday, President Obama said the situation that Russian parliament has just approved, applying its own military force in the Ukraine, was not something that the U.S. would stand for.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: Any violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity would be deeply destabilizing, which is not in the interest of Ukraine, Russia or Europe. It would represent a profound interference in matters that must be determined by the Ukrainian people.

(END VIDEO CLIP) PAUL: Joining us to discuss, democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman and CNN political commentator, and columnist for "The Blaze," Will Cain. Gentleman, thank you so much, good morning, for being with us. So let's ask right off the bat, did Russia just call our bluff? Does the U.S. look small on the world stage at this point?

ROBERT ZIMMERMAN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Look, Russia didn't call just our bluff. Russia called the European community's bluff. Let's understand, what they have engaged in is not an effort to make us look small. They've gone back to really what Vladimir Putin represents. He's a thug. These are the tactics of the old Russia, what really Russia represents, and he will continue to isolate himself from the world stage after he's made so many measures to try to ingratiate himself around the world.

BLACKWELL: Will, how much of what we're watching right now and these things are changing so quickly that it's tough to know what it will be like in 24 hours instead of six or eight months, but how much can that play into party politics here in the U.S., especially as we head to the midterms?

WILL CAIN, COLUMNIST, "THE BLAZE": Well, you know, Victor, I hope it doesn't play too much into politics. We don't want to filter these things through a political angle, although it's worth mentioning, war in and of itself, the potential for war, military conflict, is a political issue. Ultimately what I mean by that is we as the people decide the proper course of action by who we put in office and our referendum on it.

What I would say is this regarding President Obama's stance on the Ukraine right now, specifically the Crimea. We need to talk about it in terms of the Crimea because Putin is losing. A year ago he was playing for the entire country of Ukraine. Now he's fighting for Crimea, and I heard your report just now, perhaps eastern Ukraine. I would say this -- don't write checks, don't let your mouth write checks that your butt does not want to cash. We need to ask ourselves, do we want to intervene in the Ukraine.

We learned a hard lesson, President Obama learned a hard lesson a year or so ago in Syria, when he set false red lines that he did not believe and we as a nation did not want to back up. And then what did we look like on the world stage? We looked like people that did not back up their word. When it comes to Ukraine, Vladimir Putin already doesn't believe us. So don't say something, don't set a red line, don't set a course of action that you do not want to follow through with.

ZIMMERMAN: This issue is so much bigger than just neocon partisan talking points. Let's remember it was President Obama and Secretary Clinton's leadership that put extreme sanctions upon Iran that it brought them to the bargaining table and there is progress being made there. Let's also keep in mind yes, there's no question this administration is stumbling on occasion as they are in Syria. We need to do more there for the refugees. I would rather stumble towards trying to create effective negotiations than do what we did during the Bush administration, which was stumble into war. (CROSSTALK)

CAIN: It's exhausting to be accused of neocon talking points when you grant the premise of what I had to say. All I said is you acknowledge geopolitical realities and your words carry meaning. Your words have repercussions. We need to be measured. I have not said President Obama made a false or wrong statement on Ukraine, but we know that that happened a year or two ago. Just don't make the same mistake twice.

PAUL: Let's talk more about this. We will keep you all. Just stay where you are. We have to take a real quick break. We'll be right back with more to discuss. Stay close.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLACKWELL: If you're just joining us, we're covering the breaking news out of Russia this morning. The Russian parliament approved the use of military force in Ukraine. We're back with more political analysis now. Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman and CNN political commentator and columnist for "The Blaze," Will Cain.

I want to start with you, Robert. The conversation we were having just before the break, Will said the U.S. should back up its words. When the president says something at that bully pulpit, it should mean something. I want you to grade for us what you view or how you think the president performed yesterday. He kind of in some ways just reiterated what Secretary Kerry had already said, what Samantha Powers had said, there will be costs and he will stand with the international community. What does that even mean? And after Putin hears it, is there any real threat there at all?

ZIMMERMAN: Well, that's the most important point, Victor, that you're raising. I thought the president's comments yesterday were on target because they were very deliberate and very measured. Now he's got to, as this process moves forward, make it clear publicly, as I'm sure they are doing privately, that actions can include economic sanctions, building stronger ties with our European allies to isolate Putin. No one wants to buy Russian products. Maybe boycotting the G-8 summit in Sochi would be a major stick against the Russian government. So there are many steps we can take economically in terms of building coalitions that will define our effectiveness and the president has to lay it out promptly, I think.

PAUL: So Will Cain, who are -- when we look, we were just talking earlier today, too, about how the president announced yesterday or told CNN, somebody in his camp, that he wouldn't attend the G-8 if this was still going on, because they are due to be in Sochi, the G-8, in June. What kind of support does the U.S. have amongst our G-8 members?

CAIN: I think everybody, Christi, right now is in the same boat. If you look at statements from the U.K. or the French, they are all taking, as Robert has pointed out, these very measured approaches to the Ukraine, which what I am telling you is the right thing to do. I don't think the United States has a strong national security interest to get involved in Ukraine.

I'm not suggesting that our words should then back us into military or even economic sanctions on Russia in that region. What I'm saying is you need to realize that your actions and your words should match up. Right now, some are accusing President Obama's words and actions in Ukraine of being weak. I don't think so. I don't think we have a national security interest in Ukraine, so I want him to continue to be measured. I am suggesting I do not want him to make the same mistake he made in Syria.

PAUL: OK, guys, thank you so much.

BLACKWELL: Thank you so much. We have to move on to the next element here. But it has been a morning full of breaking news. We thank you for your perspective. And there is more breaking news.

PAUL: According to Reuters, Russia's upper house of parliament is asking President Vladimir Putin to recall the Russian ambassador to the U.S. Just a short time ago, the upper house unanimously Okayed Mr. Putin's request to send troops into Ukraine's Crimea region. This has all been just so fluid today, happening within a couple of hours. Barbara Starr is in Washington right now. Barbara, what do you make of this latest call to bring back the ambassador in the U.S., the Russian ambassador to the U.S.?

STARR: Well, you know, in these situations, what the U.S. wants is some stability and de-escalation. Every one of these steps is now clearly escalating the crisis and it makes it very difficult to pull back from a security and stability point of view. You get to a point in these crises where everybody steps so far ahead and engages in these steps, it becomes very difficult to pull back. And this is what the U.S. concern is. This is what the U.S. security concern is.

So I think what we're dealing with is something both very fast-moving and the unpredictability of it. I have to tell you for the last several days, both U.S. intelligence officials, Pentagon officials, State Department officials, White House officials, let's just call it across the board, have been watching Russian movements very carefully. They didn't want to talk about it publicly, but we know, you know, that they were watching them minute by minute, sometimes on TV to see what they were doing and sometimes through other sources to try and determine intelligence sources, what the Russians were up to, what their motivations were, what they might do next.

They always worried for the last several days that the Russians would engage in the small tactical movements into Crimea. But now, it has become much broader, much more significant, and the Russian military, as we've talked about earlier this morning, if they are going to be ordered to engage in a more widespread, deeper, long-lasting military operation, this becomes very significant. They have to have the airfields, the rail lines, the resupply, and they are going to have to have the ability to deal with those who will oppose them. And that suggests they will be ready for conflict, and that could not be more significant.

BLACKWELL: Barbara, last week the president said that he didn't view the conflict in Ukraine between the pro-western demonstrators and Moscow-backed leadership and now Moscow itself as an extension of the competition between the U.S. and Russia via the cold war era, but now with the parliament agreeing to pull the Russian ambassador out of the U.S., we heard from Senator McCain that he believes that Vladimir Putin sees this as an extension of the cold war. Are we looking at an extension from the characteristics we're watching of cold war tactics?

STARR: Well, I mean, hard to say because the question is, where will this go? Where is the line right now today, as we speak, between Russian political rhetoric, the parliamentary votes, the rhetoric, calling back the ambassador from Russia, and where does that rhetorical political line cross into real action by the Russians?

The U.S. view I think it is fair to say had always been for the last several weeks that Putin would move to demonstrate muscle power, to send a signal to both the west and to Ukraine that Russia was a player and that Russia would move to protect its vital interests that it saw in Ukraine. All of that basically is rhetoric. If Putin is now going to move to an extended political and potential military confrontation with Ukraine and the west potentially, then it becomes -- it becomes very difficult.

As we talked about earlier, what do they do about it? NATO has no intention of doing anything militarily. Most NATO countries are still trying to get themselves extricated from Afghanistan. They have very small military budgets and very small military forces. This is a challenge to NATO. This is a challenge to the alliance that was formed in Europe to basically challenge the old Soviet Union. It's a direct challenge to NATO. Can they work through the United Nations? Russia is on the Security Council. It can veto anything that the United Nations would vote on.

They say there's going to be diplomatic action and diplomatic pressure. Hard to see what levers can be pulled to accomplish that. But already, the U.S. has said it may not go to the G-8 economic summit. There are financial international implications here, financial steps the west may try and take. It's very fast-moving. It's very difficult to predict.

PAUL: Barbara Starr, thank you so much, from Washington for us, Pentagon reporter.

We have more live coverage of the breaking news in the Ukraine when we return.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLACKWELL: If you're just joining us, we are covering the breaking news from Ukraine and Russia this morning. The two breaking news stories, developments in this ongoing story, in just the last hour to 90 minutes, first, Reuters is reporting that President Putin has asked the Russian parliament to approve a plan that would pull the Russian ambassador to the U.S. back to Moscow. The second element happened earlier today when President Putin asked the Russian parliament to approve a plan to send troops into the Crimean region of the Ukraine.

Let's put up the map just to understand where this region is and why this is so crucial.

PAUL: We should point out, too, that that second -- that first request earlier today to send forces into Crimea was granted. And it happened very, very quickly amongst parliament members. So we could hear very quickly as well based on Reuters' report about the ambassador to the U.S. as well.

BLACKWELL: This vote to send in the troops was unanimous, 89 in favor, none opposed. But you see that red area there? That is part of Ukraine. However, in that portion of the country, it's filled with Russian-speaking Ukrainians. They feel closer aligned to Russia while the rest of the Ukraine feels an affinity for the west. So we see here why that region is so important. We will talk more about what we're hearing from German officials this morning from Twitter and how they could play a role in what happens moving forward.

PAUL: Stay close. We have more for you in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLACKWELL: The breaking news in the CNN Newsroom now, Russia's parliament gives President Vladimir Putin the green light to send troops into Ukraine's Crimea region. We have live pictures of Russia's parliament. Lawmakers unanimously approved Mr. Putin's request for troops just a short time ago.

PAUL: Ukraine says thousands of Russian troops have already moved into Crimea. It wants them out. There is also this. According to Reuters, Russia's upper house of parliament is asking President Vladimir Putin to recall the Russian ambassador to the U.S. Just a short time ago, the upper house unanimously Okayed that request to send troops into Ukraine's Crimea region. We are talking 89-0, unanimous. The approval came despite warnings from Washington not to intervene. So a big part of the question now that we're watching is how will the U.S. respond and how quickly, because all of this this morning has happened really within the last 90 minutes.

BLACKWELL: And I think part of the question is after President Obama made that speech yesterday in the briefing room at the White House, what will these costs that he mentioned, that if Russia invades the sovereignty of Ukraine, what will the costs be? There are other of course members of the G-8, the president said that the U.S. -- not the president. Senior White House officials told Jim Acosta the president would not be going to the G-8 in June if this is still going on.

PAUL: The G-8 is in Sochi.

BLACKWELL: Yes, in Sochi, in Russia there. We have this from Frank Walter Steinmeier, the German foreign minister. He tweeted this morning on the situation in Crimea, "Whoever pours more oil on the fire now is consciously aiming for further escalation. What Russia does in Crimea must be keeping with sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine." So the question here is, should the president lead this discussion or should Angela Merkel lead this discussion, considering the relationship between President Obama and Putin versus the relationship between Putin and Merkel? PAUL: Exactly. We've had a lot of people on this morning talking about the fact that the U.S. does not see this as a cold war but that they believe Putin does, and that he has -- Putin is really working to show that he is strong, to show his strength. The question is, what is the U.S. going to be able to do about this? So we are obviously going to obviously continue to follow this throughout the morning. Thank you so much for spending your morning with us. Don't go away.

BLACKWELL: Be sure to keep it right here. We continue with our breaking news coverage in the CNN Newsroom. We hand it over to Deborah Feyerick.