Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Crisis in Ukraine; U.S. Threatens Sanctions; Defending Obama From Politics During Crisis; Putin Has Puzzled U.S. Leaders for Years

Aired March 04, 2014 - 15:30   ET

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

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back to our continuing coverage of the crisis here in Ukraine. It is about 10:30 on Tuesday night, at the end of what has been a very fast-moving day.

And over the past half-hour or so, we have been reporting about Russia test-firing a long-range -- a long-range missile, a test that they said was preplanned before this situation in Crimea. The test occurred today in Russia's Central Asian region.

General Spider Marks joins us now from Washington. He's retired from the U.S. Army and is a CNN military analyst.

General Marks, it's good to have you on the program.

What do you make of this missile test? They say and the United States is saying that this is preplanned. Any reason for concern about it?

BRIG. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: I don't think so, Anderson.

Clearly, when the Russian Federation announces a priori that they're about to have a missile launch -- and, clearly, they have had thousands of missile launches before -- I don't think we should make much of this.

Clearly, in the context of what's taking place in Crimea, we're going to put what I would call a much greater spotlight on the incident, but I don't think there's much to this, other than what was routinely already on the shelf.

COOPER: Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and German Chancellor Angela Merkel both -- we have heard from both within the past day. And they both remarked that Vladimir Putin might be delusional.

Do you see anything in his actions, in Ukraine, in Crimea, that makes you share that assessment? Or do you see him as a rational actor?

MARKS: Anderson, I certainly can't speak to the conversations that those two great leaders have had with Putin.

What I can say is that these activities that Putin has undertaken already clearly indicates to me that he's a very rational leader. He subscribes to the notion of practical, tough politics in order for him to achieve his national interests, and he also sees just -- he really is -- he's subject to what I call the tyranny of geography.

Russia is a land-locked country two-thirds of the year. His only access is through the Black Sea, and that's Crimea, so it's extremely important for him that that not spin out of control and end up in a European sphere that further puts pressure on him.

I see this as Putin acting clearly in his own best interests.

COOPER: And no matter what happens here, no matter how much of a tilt toward the West or toward the European Union there may be or desire there may be on the parts of particularly people in western Ukraine, when you look at the geography, Ukraine has to have relations and will remain reliant in many ways on Russia in the coming years.

So regardless of what is happening right now, there has to be some sort of a diplomatic solution that's worked out, because that relationship has to continue, just as a matter of geography, correct?

MARKS: Absolutely correct, Anderson. Clearly Russia understands that and Putin understands that imminently.

Russian gas, natural gas and oil flows through Ukraine. Putin understands that as well.

But if this becomes too hard, if Putin pushes too hard, it's not inconceivable that the European Union would begin to buy its gas from others, such as the United States, from the United Kingdom, so he is walking a very delicate line right now.

That's why I don't anticipate that Putin is going to take any other move in Ukraine, that what he's achieved in Crimea allows him to establish certainty that it's not going flip and be something he won't be able to access and he's going to hold this. Ironically in two weeks if everything remains as it is, he remains a good guy for not taking additional bad moves.

That's the irony and we have to be prepared to realize that Crimea is probably going to be annexed and there will be no roll back of Russian forces in Crimea back to some status quo. It's just not going to happen.

COOPER: I'm curious, I think I know the answer to this and I know your answer to this because it's the answer of just about every military analyst --

MARKS: Maybe I'll surprise you.

COOPER: When Vladimir Putin says that it's not Russian -- well, no.

When Vladimir Putin says it's not Russian military forces on the ground in Crimea, when you look at their weaponry, when you look at just their bearing, does that -- is there even a shadow of a doubt in your mind that these are Russian forces? MARKS: There's no doubt in my mind that they're Russian forces. He may be labeling these forces self defense forces, guard forces, part of a larger Crimea force.

That's a distinction without a difference. These are Russian soldiers on the ground in Crimea executing what looks like a very effective military operation.

COOPER: Effective indeed, just within a matter of 24 hours taking control of Crimea.

General "Spider" Marks, appreciate you being on. Thanks very much. Always good to have you on.

We're just getting word that Canada is halting its military operations with Russia. Its prime minister said it will suspend all planned bilateral activities between Canadian armed forces and the Russian Federation military.

Now, the U.S., obviously, made a similar move on Monday, Canada following the U.S. on that.

We have much more on the crisis in Ukraine, coming up.

The U.S. threatening sanctions against Russia, as are others, we'll take a look at what that might mean.

We'll tell you about a secret document captured on camera that indicate some of our closest allies are not on board with that. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Hey, welcome back. I'm Anderson Cooper with our continuing coverage of the crisis here in Ukraine.

The U.S.'s condemnation of Russia's aggression in Ukraine could lead to sanctions.

Now, the U.S. is promising to impose them if Vladimir Putin opposes stepping back from Crimea.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SENATOR ROBERT MENENDEZ (D), NEW JERSEY: The Senate foreign relations committee is, as we speak, developing a bipartisan legislative package to provide critical support to the Ukraine and at the same time pursue a series, a menu of sanctions for those who violate international law.

You must say what you mean and mean what you say and that is what we intend to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, there's one major potential problem. Not all U.S. allies may support those sanctions. Here now to talk about that and discuss what kind of penalties the U.S. may be able to impose and how the allies would react, especially in the European Union, our CNN correspondent Tom Foreman and CNN International anchor Becky Anderson, live in London.

Tom, let me start with you. What do we know about potential sanctions right now proposed by the U.S.?

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: What we know is a lot of talk and nothing is concrete yet. We've got this idea that plans for the G-8 in Sochi have been suspended. Trade and investment talks with Russia have been cancelled.

But beyond that we seem to be talking, Anderson, about this broad sense of economic pressure, whatever that might be. We do know that Russia could be ripe for some kind of pressure. They were hit very hard by the recession in 2008.

And, look at this, GDP of the U.S., almost $17 trillion a year. GDP of the European Union almost $16 trillion a year. The GDP of Russia, about $2.6 trillion.

So, by comparison, that is small. It might be pushed around by these other bigger economies if -- if, as you noted, Anderson, they all get together on it.

COOPER: And that's a huge "if" right now.

And, Becky, let me bring you in on that from London, because there was a secret document actually captured on camera, which is fascinating, indicates the United Kingdom is not on board with sanctions or may not be on board with sanctions.

What do we know about it?

BECKY ANDERSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Yeah, whether by default or by design, as some are suggesting here, the display of that document being carried by a senior British official to a National Security Council meeting in the past 24 hours or so is, one, an embarrassment to the U.K., it's got to be said.

But, two, sort of clearly shows this stance by the U.K., which would be long-term sanctions between the U.K. and Russia, would be economically very difficult.

Now, it is our understanding that document didn't actually make the sort of final policy discussions when it comes to E.U. sanctions going forward, but the very fact it said things like do not close London's financial center to Russians is really important here.

Let's be quite frank. Some $60 billion or so of trade between the U.K. and Russia is -- goes on, on an annual basis. Coming back the other way is about $40 billion.

And this is about Russians investing in London and its financial center and, indeed, in property and businesses here across the U.K. Now, back to the disclosure of that document, snapped by one of the photographers here on Downing Street, this is what the foreign secretary, William Hague, had to say about that a little earlier on.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM HAGUE, BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY: Any such photographing or making any documents available for photographing is absolutely regrettable and should not happen, and I hope all officials will ensure in the future it does not happen.

Nevertheless, it should also be seen in perspective, so I can't agree with him that it has those implications.

I want to make absolutely clear that anything that is written in one document being carried by one official is not necessarily any guide to the decisions that will be made by Her Majesty's government, and our options remain very much open on this subject.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON: Right, and officially, Anderson, the word from here at Number 10 Downing Street, which of course is the residence of the British prime minister, is that he is in lock-step with his international partners.

Let me just read you and our viewers what was said today.

"The U.K. has made it clear that continuing to violate Ukraine's sovereignty will have costs and consequences.

"We will take decisions on what these are in close collaboration with the E. U. and G-7 and together are considering a range of diplomatic, political and economic measures."

But as Tom rightly points out and as you've been discussing, what those economic measures might be, what these trade sanctions could be, what the freezing of potential assets of Russians could be is really in play at the moment.

And I certainly don't believe, nor do those experts I've been speaking to today, believe that there is a cohesive E.U. policy on trade sanctions with Russia at this point.

COOPER: And, Becky, there are plenty of very wealthy Russians doing business in the United Kingdom, for example, and in past years, the United Kingdom has been reluctant to try to curtail those kind of activities based on things that Vladimir Putin is doing, correct?

So it wouldn't be completely out of the realm of belief that the United Kingdom might drag its feet on limiting financial interactions with Russians?

ANDERSON: I think you make a very good point. You know, a number of the football clubs here, the UPL is a number of business, and a number of the football clubs are owned by Russians.

In the past we've given economic asylum to Russians who have fallen out with Moscow and the Kremlin.

There is a very difficult diplomatic decision to be made by all E.U. countries at this pointing, not least, for example, the Germans, who do even more business with the Russians on a bilateral basis than we do here in the U.K.

Listen, we all understand and agree that energy is the battleground that nobody wants a fight on between the E.U. and Russia at this point. We take about a third of our energy from Russia, and in turn, we pay their bills. Both sides of that equation is very important.

But you rightly point out it's more than just energy at this point, and there are legacies here upon which decisions I think will be made going forward.

COOPER: Becky Anderson, great to have you on the program, Tom Foreman as well. Thanks very much.

Reuters is reporting Russia's foreign minister spokesman saying that, if the United States applies sanctions -- saying if the U.S. applies sanctions, Russia will, quote, "have to respond." Left unsaid exactly what that response would be.

Now, critics say President Obama has had a weak foreign policy and that that gave Vladimir Putin the confidence to move troops into the Ukraine. We've heard that from some, particularly conservatives.

Our next guest says, Not so fast. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Hey, well, welcome back to our continuing coverage of the crisis in Ukraine.

President Obama has been getting a lot of criticism for his actions regarding Ukraine. Criticizing the president is one thing, but suggesting that his past actions and policies have somehow encouraged Putin to act is quite another.

CNN political commentator joins us, Peter Beinart, contributing editor for Atlantic Media. He joins me now from New York.

Peter, I just read your latest article for "The Atlantic" and it's really fascinating. You say there is no way that President Obama's foreign policy has encouraged Vladimir Putin to act.

Explain.

PETER BEINART, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR, ATLANTIC MEDIA: Well, first of all, Vladimir Putin did something very similar in 2008 when he sent Russian troops into Georgia to spark secessionist movements there, so it's a little hard to say that Barack Obama's policies led Vladimir Putin to start throwing his weight around in former Soviet republics when he did the same thing under a guy named George W. Bush.

COOPER: President Bush, who, by the way, talked about looking into -- basically seeing Vladimir Putin's soul.

BEINART: Right. And the larger stories -- I'm not saying this in any way to justify Putin's thuggish behavior, but to suggest that Russia is on the march here is to forget that a couple of decades ago when I was growing up, the borders of the Soviet Empire reached all the way to Prague and Budapest and Berlin.

If Barack Obama is a wimp for not more aggressively confronting Russia's invasion of Crimea, then what do we call Dwight Eisenhower who stood back when Russian troops entered Budapest?

Americans are not willing to put our son's and daughter's lives on the line. That doesn't mean we can't use economic sanctions, we can't use tough diplomacy and all kinds of things, but this really didn't start with Barack Obama.

COOPER: You also write about sort of this conflict from the perspective of Vladimir Putin, and it's an interesting way to look at it.

And, as you say, you're not in any way justifying his actions in Crimea, which are not justifiable, but you point out that from his perspective, the West has actually continued to move further east in ways that, at the time of the fall of the Soviet Union, would have been unthinkable to many even in the United States.

BEINART: Right. In 1990, in February 1990, James Baker, who was then George H. W. Bush's secretary of state, promised the United States would never put troops in East Germany, let alone Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary and then into countries like Lithuanian, Estonia, Latvia, that were inside the former Soviet Union.

I'm not saying that that NATO expansion was a bad thing. I think it was probably a good thing in terms of promoting democracy and stability.

But if you're being looking at it from Moscow's point of view, you don't see the West in retreat. What you see is the West pushing further and further towards your borders.

Vladimir Putin's way of responding to this, I think, is crude and lawless, but to say that somehow the United States is in retreat in that part of the world just makes no sense to me.

COOPER: Is there a danger on the part of the United States and the European Union in promising too much to Ukraine, given just the geography of this region and the reliance that Ukraine has on Russia, whether they want to or not?

BEINART: Right. This is a really important balancing act. On the one hand, we need to try to strengthen the government in Kiev, economically. We need to try and give it more democratic legitimacy. It is very important to remember this government was not elected. It came about as a result of street protests and it has real legitimacy issues.

But we also would do a real disservice to the people of Ukraine if we gave them the impression that when push comes to shove, NATO is going to fight for them inside Ukraine, because we're not.

You can't go to ordinary Americans, especially in the wake of Iraq and Afghanistan, and tell them that we're going to put our soldiers in harm's way in Crimea or eastern Ukraine.

We're just not going to, so we have to try to make sure that we strengthen them as we can, but we don't make promises that we can't keep.

COOPER: Peter Beinart, it's a fascinating article. I encourage readers to look it up. Thanks very much.

The Kremlin and the White House, we're going to be focusing on that coming up. This is not the first time that the two have been at odds in recent years, as Peter was just mentioning.

We're going to take a look at how Vladimir Putin has puzzled the U.S. leaders for years now in many different ways.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Welcome back.

Watch Secretary of State John Kerry when a reporter told him today that Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, who had just given a press conference, would not acknowledge invading troops in Crimea were Russian.

Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He denied that there were any Russian troops in Crimea, occupying the Crimea.

He blamed the crisis on the United States' interference, saying that the U.S. --

JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: He really defied that there were troops in Crimea?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, he did. He also blamed the crisis on --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That's just the latest example of how Putin confounds the White House in many ways, now and certainly in the past.

Our Suzanne Malveaux joins us from D.C. with more on how Putin certainly pushes a lot of buttons of the United States.

Suzanne?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, it was almost five years ago that President Obama announced he wanted to reset relations with Russia, but we've watched this attempt of a reset time and time again as President Bush tried to read Vladimir Putin's intentions over the years and now Obama.

As we are now learning, you can't really win predicting what Putin is going to do next, but that certainly has not stopped anyone from trying.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MALVEAUX: When George W. Bush met Vladimir Putin --

FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy.

MALVEAUX: The "bromance" was widely panned as naive, particularly after the relationship was strained when Russia offered support to Syria and Iran.

When you say you looked into his eyes and his soul, you'll also be meeting with the Russian leader in about a week or so.

What do you think of Putin now that he's expressed a willingness to supply weapons to outlaw regimes.

BUSH: I know that Putin understands the dangers of Iran with a nuclear weapon.

MALVEAUX: When President Obama first met Putin in 2009, they looked uncomfortable, an observation even Obama acknowledged over the years.

BARACK OBAMA: I know the press likes to focus on the body language and he's got that kind of slouch, looking like the bored kid in the back of the classroom.

MALVEAUX: Nobody is bored now, some Democrats and Republicans even questioning Putin's sanity for pushing the world to the brink.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I think he like to strike on the world stage and it could have an impact on him psychologically.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: I think that is the tragedy that is going on. Putin is in many ways, I think, delusional about this.

MALVEAUX: Trying to get a read on the former KGB agent fond of flaunting his bare chest and hunting game can be a movie target, and, of course, a political minefield.

Relations with Russia once seen as a punch line.

TINA FEY, COMEDIAN: And I can see Russia from my house.

MALVEAUX: People aren't laughing now.

SARAH PALIN (R), FORMER VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: People are looking at Putin as one who wrestles bears and drills for oil.

They look at our president as one who wears mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates.

MALVEAUX: Could anybody predict that Putin would be such a pain now?

Mitt Romney did, but he was mocked for his warning in 2012.

OBAMA: A few months ago when you were asked what is the biggest geopolitical threat facing the United States, you said Russia, not Al- Qaeda. You said Russia.

And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because, you know, the Cold War has been over for 20 years.

MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I have clear eyes on this. I'm not going to wear rose-colored eyes when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MALVEAUX: Today, President Obama very careful not to attack President Putin, personally or directly. Instead, he used a legal argument for Putin's behavior, saying that Putin seems to have a different set of lawyers making a different set of interpretations for his aggression regarding Ukraine.

But, privately, senior administration officials are not confident that they can predict where Putin's head is at and what he will do next.

Anderson?

COOPER: Suzanne Malveaux, thanks very much.

I want to thank our viewers for joining me. I'm going to be back live from Kiev for "AC 360" at 8:00 p.m. Eastern time in the United States, which is about 3:00 a.m. here in Kiev.

For our international viewers, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is next. For our domestic viewers, our coverage of the crisis in the Ukraine with "THE LEAD" with Jake Tapper. Jake?