>> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." >> we continue our coverage in ukraine. the crimean parliament announced a referendum on if the region

can join russia. president obama said it will violate international law. >> the proposed referendum would violate the ukrainian constitution and violate international law. any discussion about the future of ukraine must include the legitimate government of ukraine. in 2014, we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over democratic leaders. >> pressure has been increased on visa restrictions and obama signed an order enabling sanctions against moscow. john kerry continues his discussion with russian foreign minister lavrov in rome. >> we want president putin and russia and everybody to understand our preference is to get back to normality and get back to a place where the rights of the people of the ukraine will be respected and the

territory of the nation will be respected. the united states will continue to stand with the ukrainian people as allies and friends in the community and elsewhere in order to stand up for the values that we all believe in our fellow -- that define our fellow democracies. >> eu officials held a meeting in brussels to discuss the crisis and talks on a wide range economic pact with russia and threatened sanctions. joining me now from washington is tom donilon, he has served as president obama's national security advisor. set this up before me. what is our obligation and responsibility here? >> the united states has an important obligation. we are talking about europe.

the preservation of the order and norm put in place in the post-cold war era. and they are being violated. in an attempt by one state armed force to lop off another state. this is an important leadership moment for the united states. the united states is working with its allies. to work through this problem and that is why you have the president taking the lead on political embrace of the ukrainian interim government as secretary kerry leading negotiations trying to get to an agreement at least an interim state. it is an important leadership moment for the united states. >> the russians, you know the president, you saw him last may. tell me where you think his head is in this. >> as a general matter, the concept of sphere of influence, balance of power, zero-sum

games, these are very real concepts to president putin. he has set about trying to do fine russian policies separate and independent from the foreign policy of the west. he has defined it as a counterpoint to the u.s. and in west. he sees threats to his country. his view is very much a view of a russia as a surrounded by a set of countries as he regard as the former soviet republic and a russian sphere of influence to be protected. in this case, he was dealt a big blow. he had this rather fanciful view that he can put together a eurasian union and that will be a counterpart to the european union. it is fanciful but it is almost impossible. >> ukraine has a special place in russian history. >> this whole crisis is dripping

with history that needs to be understood. demography including the makeup of ukraine. that makeup and historical implications have been a history of ukraine and including the last quarter of a century. and there are geopolitics here. it is important to understand the history of ukraine. in many ways, a tragic history. they have tried and carved out a place as an independent nation. >> you believe putin is driven by this eurasian union that he can create as part of his own legacy of coming back from the very darkest days after the fall of soviet union? >> i think he believes ukraine is essential of having a sphere of influence including the former soviet republic that he includes important for the future of russia. these comments are made about

these comments are made about how russian ethnics and speakers under some sort of threat turned out to be demonstrably false. trying to keep ukraine from orienting to europe. they are going to. the fall of the president in ukraine was precisely due to the fact he pulled back an association of trade agreement with europe because of the objections as some of the basically, payment that russia was willing to make to offset its pulling back. that was the cause of the crisis. putin thought it was unacceptable. >> was there any possibility that if europe had moved faster they could have made the connection and avoided some of this? >> i think in that europe could have moved faster and probably moved strongly here.

they had a year-long negotiation with the ukraine. they fully expected to sign this thing at a summit in november. but, yanukovych pulled back. russia has considerable leverage. what they did and have done with ukraine is to effectively trade. they had a very large say over the price and supply of natural gas in the ukraine. they cut off natural gas twice in recent years. putin and the russians do have leverage here. that is what this is about. it is about a balance of power and sphere of influence in putin's mind to get a grip and more influence and leverage after a big blow. >> do you recognize russia should have sphere of influence? >> not to the extent that they can determine the direction in

which the sovereign nation are going to take themselves. the fundamental printable that a country is 46 million people, the ukraine, should them to decide if they want a free trade agreement and association agreement with the eu. the position of the united states was not that it would be done to the exclusion of a relationship with russia. the historical ties and economic ties between ukraine and russia are substantial and will be ongoing. the united states and eu did not consider the association with europe to be exclusive. putin would not tolerate it. his view was a relation was going to be exclusive to the exclusion in other relationships with the europeans. and of course, what he understood, charlie, if in fact the ukraine oriented itself, it would not be part of any type of eurasian union.

and it would trust toward -- drift toward ties with europe which is where the country wants to go. instead of being in favor, he is in favor of exclusion and keep in the countries as close to him and under his domination. >> what is going to happen in crimea? >> it is not clear. they set this vote to decide whether or not they wanted to associate with russia or the ukraine. like the president said earlier and the europeans, it is blatantly illegal under the constitution and international law. a number of things have to go on here. one is i do think and we have to keep our eye on all of them. we do need to support this government in kiev, the new interim government. putin will do all he can to keep

it destabilized because he does not want to recognize this interim government. it is important for us to politically support. i would have the next meeting in kiev and economically support them. there's a $1 billion loan agreement on the table. it is important that we continue the efforts of john kerry to get into some sort of the definition of a final state, interim state of the escalation of the situation. one last thing, it is really dangerous. you have a situation in crimea where you have ukrainian soldiers on their own soil, on bases, active-duty soldiers, who are being basically surrounded by russian soldiers despite the fact that an extraordinary statement of by lavrov and russian defense minister said that were not russian soldiers but highly defense soldiers in crimea. that is blatantly false.

>> henry kissinger was here last night. he said it was not a bad thing. if we do not assume those troops are disappearing, russia does not have to look like a defeat for them. >> i think -- two different points. it may provide an easier way for them to back off because they are not identify and they have not claimed them as russian troops even though putin came close to doing that in the press conference. i would describe how dangerous it is because you can imagine young soldiers who are faced off like that, you can imagine an accident or miscalculation or emotional action where somebody gets killed and we have a really serious situation. it is important to try and get it to a set of understandings here as quickly as possible. the only thing is to reassure our nato partners. and we need to put in place

where we begun it now sanctions and pressure on the russian government. the discussion has been we do not have a lot of leverage. that is not true. putin, his foreign-policy, is a foreign-policy of unique russian stance in the world. reestablishes a major player in the world separate and apart to the united states and the west. and he can do that. he can stand defiantly aside on the political front. your economy cannot be unplugged from a globalized economy. somebody wrote the other day in 1968 when the russians invaded czechoslovakia, there was not -- the stock market in russia did not crash because there was not a stock market. the case today is a russia is integrated into the globalized economy and they have all of those of our abilities. their banking system, trade,

travel. a real price to be paid. putin has come to grips. he has not fully calculated the economic pressure and price put on him. >> he has no appreciation of how severe the sanctions if in fact europe -- would affect russia? >> he is underestimating the pressure. you are right. if in fact, there are broad-based sanctions, a number of countries participating, especially russia which is third-largest market. >> bob gates was here saying he worries very much that europe will not be able to come together on this. >> we will have discussions with the europeans. this would be an american leadership issue. work with the europeans close and in lockstep. to do the things i talked about in terms of embracing kiev and

trying to de-escalate. essentially, where this is going, the europeans and united states will put -- in front of russia in terms of when we start to de-escalate and what are things we can agree to here which would de-escalate the situation? can we have monitors come into all of ukraine? get a fair report to ensure that the russian affect -- ethnics are being protected. to get us to a better place step-by-step. if russia over the course of a few days refuse, europeans will come along with sanctions. the key on this will be angela merkel. she has a leading economy in europe. she also has a direct and long-term relationship with president putin. she is going to be the key player in europe. >> what did you make of her remark that she was not sure he

was rational? after a phone conversation with him? >> i was not on the call. when you talk to president putin, he has a distinctive view of the facts. he is willing to make a case like we saw in the press conference publicly and in private that does not adhere to the facts. my view is this. i think he is pretty clear on his strategic interest and iraq should -- and the direction. he is a direct person to deal with. i do think he is an autocrat. and the longer you are an autocrat, the less you are challenged by people around you. that is the way it works. it is really -- to say russia has a foreign policy system. they do not have a system -- they have one guy who makes all the major decisions in my

opinion and dealing with the russians over the last couple of years. it was different frankly under the former president. i saw when he was inaugurated, it was clear he was going in a different direction and very different style. >> that includes his relation with the united states? >> it does. the principal hot point here with respect to the united states has been syria. we had a fundamental disagreement. putin tells the story from kosovo to afghanistan to libya to syria. going to stand up against the west and was acting under the united states to move under these regimes. that has been the position he has taken.

the russians have been really, really a serious problem in quite a destructive of the situation in syria. >> notwithstanding the initial agreement to get the chemical weapons out of syria? >> i am tough but the broader scope of things in syria. with respect to the chemical weapons, it is a very good agreement and important for us to get back to cooperation and more important to push the syrians to meet their obligations. that is an example of a russian/u.s. cooperation. we had not had the ukraine situation and it could've been something we could build and hopefully we can into the future. it is important piece of business. >> worst case scenario and then the best case. worst case would be reigniting the cold war. >> a couple of elements. one is something i alluded to earlier.

this is something that experts in this area have worried about. crimea has been a potential tinderbox from the outset of creation of the ukraine's independence 23 years ago. because the ethnic makeup and history. and because you could have a confrontation between ukraine and russia. that is the thing i worry about. in fact, you have a military confrontation there which can escalate. and that would obviously be the worst-case scenario followed by a civil war situation in ukraine. before we get to cold war, you could have a hot war in ukraine. that is the thing we need to be very focused on which john kerry focused on the president obama and the europeans are focused on. they are trying to ensure we

de-escalate and get in place conversations between ukraine and russia for a standdown so you would not have a hot war in ukraine and crimea and god for bid in eastern ukraine. that is the worst-case scenario. that will be extraordinarily destructive event which we would do everything we can to prevent. that's the worst-case. beyond that, you could have a next stage which would be a standoff between the west and the united states on the one hand and the russians on the other. you can have a real deterioration in relations for an extended period of time if the russians in any way response with the negotiations underway in europe to try to find a way to find a stable place and a standdown of de-escalation. that would be a place where we

would be at having difficult time addressing a lot of global issues. >> best case scenario? >> best case scenario would be that one, the instrument government of kiev can pull off a nationwide set of elections in may. number two, that government and support adequately by the international community and imf. a stable government. i have no doubt that the government is elected not to their liking they will continue to pressure that the government. a third would be, a predicate to the first 2, a standdown in crimea where you have monitors were the russians go to their bases if they are given assurances to the protection of ethnic russians a given unambiguous guarantees and

understanding to respect to their very large black sea fleet base. events by the way, i am sure when putin got back from the olympics where he spent $50 billion trying to enhance russia's image, he got back and i am pretty sure the first thing that his folks said to him was we have to make sure we can protect our bases. >> you have the united states arguing and making the case is a violation of international law for russian troops to be in there. on the other hand, vladimir putin saying it was an unconstitutional coup to overthrow a democratically elected president. >> yeah. he left the country number one. number two, the interim government was approved by 82%

of the ukrainian parliament. and in fact, all but a few of yanukovych's party voted for the new government. that party issued a statement saying that they are a party and was held hostage by a corrupt family which was true. the level of corruption has been extraordinary. the facts are he was rejected by the ukrainian people. they had a process where they elected a interim government and he fled. indeed, his own party has disowned him. it is a little rich for putin to make this comment given if you watch the press conference how derisive he was about to the former president of ukraine. >> is it reasonable to say that putin was embarrassed by yanukovych and felt he had to do something? >> i do not know if he was embarrassed by yanukovych and i think it is basically that if they had lost the battle here to

keep ukraine from orienting and associated with europe and the west and he would try to do something. leverage and disruptive that in any way he can. the fact is and the russians understand, yanukovych is not coming back to ukraine. his own party will not have him. a situation where you have a interim government and they set a date for elections and a sensible way to proceed. in all events, a response cannot be because you disagree with even in a sovereign country, in fact, it provides you with any legal basis on which to bring your troops into that country. and occupy a portion of it. that is obviously not called for. indeed, putin had a number of

ways he could've gone if he was worried about the protection of minorities. he could've entered into agreements with the ukraine and asked for monitors and went to the u.n. they did not do any of this. this was a swift operation led by the russian security force to go in and reestablish leverage in the wake of their having a below to their political situation. >> henry kissinger was here last night. he has an op-ed. it appeared in "the washington post." he makes these 4 points. point number one, ukraine should have the right to choose associations including with europe. everybody would agree with that. >> absolutely.

that is the key point. what europeans have been making. it does not have to be exclusive with us. you cannot call a ukraine to have specific agreements with you. >> ukraine should not join nato, a position kissinger took seven years ago. do you agree? >> we are well short of that at this point. i think i saw polling at the time when it was considered for the majority of ukrainians did not want to join nato. >> the ukraine should be free trade and government compatible with its people between various parts of the country and internationally they should pursue a comparable government to finland. >> with respect to finland, that is the point about having a relationship going in either direction which is perfectly

appropriate. >> it is incompatible with symbols of existing rule but it should be possible to put crimea's relationship on a less fraught basis. ukraine should reinforce crimea's autonomy and elections held. it would include removing inabilities about the black sea. >> that is all sensible. i do not think the russians are interested in that sort of outcome. let's say, that is not where the russians are. it is sensible. and certainly, kerry is probably pursuing things along those lines. kissinger said later, not all of the parts would agree with this. you have to get the best possible outcome.

i want to go back to the third point which is really important which is a reconciliation. as i said earlier, it is important for the united states and the west to support ukraine and a brace. i would have the next foreign minister be in kiev and john kerry bring the entire group to kiev for meetings to demonstrate the embrace of the world to the government. quite strongly advocating a quick economic assistance. but, we also need to make clear to the kiev government about reconciliation and embracing all ukrainians is really absolutely required. for going forward. the history of ukraine over the last quarter century has been back and forth, east/west divide. fight over who is going to be on top -- russian oriented group or

western oriented group in the west? there needs to be leadership there that says signals and embrace all of ukraine. it is a really, really important point going forward. the first thing the ukraine parliament the did was to notify a 2012 law which allowed russia to be used as a common language. the new president repealed that which was an important step. >> does this move forward or backward u.s./russia relations? >> this is a -- this is a pretty severe crisis with u.s./russia relations. the outcome will determine for

some time to come. the history of it, we came into office, obama came into office to pursue a relation with russia and we try to get as much done as we could and we got quite a bit done including a treaty. russia supports for wto. a number of other things. >> tom donilon, thank you for joining us. i thank you. >> thank you, charlie. ♪ >> wes anderson is here. he is one of the most original filmmakers. his movies are known for visual style. his new movie is set in a fictional town in pre-world war ii europe. it follows a concierge and lobby boy who becomes his trusted friend. here is the trailer for "the grand budapest hotel."

>> why do you want to be a lobby boy? >> who wouldn't? >> my life began. junior lobby boy in training under strict supervision. many of the most valued and distinguished guests came for him. >> i love you. >> this was also when i met her. >> she is charming. >> so charming. >> i approve. >> houston be my counselor and guardian. -- he was to be my counselor and guardian. >> she has been murdered. >> stop! >> you are looking so well, darling. you are. >> this is madame's last -- a painting bequeathed.

>> if you lay a finger on my mother, living or dead. >> we need to make a plan for your survival. we may need a magnifying glass but it tells you how to find it. >> that is the term. >> ♪ >> i want -- every 100 kilometers. >> ♪ >> you cannot arrest him because he is a bloody immigrant.

>> take your hands off of him! >> ♪ >> have you ever been questioned by authorities? >> i was arrested and tortured. >> i am pleased to have wes anderson back at the table. we looked at a rather long trailer. >> do i even need to see the movie? >> when you watch the trailer, tell me what you saw? what is the artistry? >> we have a great cast. we have ray fiennes, who is a rare powerhouse. i always had this impression of him as a shakesphereean actor. but the thing i realize working with him is he is more like a

method actor and a marlon brando kind of actor. and i love that. it is -- i had a similar experience with gene hackman as somebody who takes it. years ago. yes, we have a great ensemble. >> describe jude law. >> jude law plays -- there is a sort of framing device in the movie in the 1960's. it is in the 1930's, most of the movie. we have an author played by jude who meets a character and jude sort of narrates. he is our guide into the story. >> and the story is? >> the story is, it is about a hotel concierge who has a whole kind of circle of women

admirers, mostly rich, older women. one of them dies. he gets sort of caught up in the family -- kind of a fight for the inheritance. >> some say about you is you want people to have fun on your set that you want people you like on your set. you love making movies. why not make it an adventure? >> you said it perfectly well. that is how i feel. we went to this town -- we went around hungary and czech republic and poland and wandered all around figure out where we would do the movie and how. we found this department store in a town, a little city on the polish border in germany. it was a great location for us to build the lobby of the hotel.

partly location and partly a set. we found this little hotel in the middle of the city that i felt we could take over this place and all live there. it turned out to be a perfect kind of home base for us. >> how did you find the story? >> well, there is a real person who is one the inspiration. it is based on a real person, an old friend of mine. there is also -- i started reading this author and only maybe six years ago or so i started reading his stuff. i had never heard of him. the more i read, the more i thought i could do something -- i can do my version of his world. >> what happened to him? >> he was a -- he was from

vienna. he grew up in vienna before the first world war where art was the center of everything. vienna was the center of art and europe. he saw this obliterated by the first world war and nationalism and fascism and communism was on its way. he got out early. he was a jew in vienna and he got out before their episodes and he cleared out early. he did not really recover from what he witnessed and what he felt was happening in europe. and he ended up eventually, he was here in new york and then he ended up in south america and brazil.

in 1942, he commits suicide with his wife. that is the end of the story which is part of a why -- at least until a few years ago, he was a forgotten voice in america at least. >> he was a best selling author in europe. >> the biggest. >> gustav h. is? >> the concierge manager. >> he is based on a friend of yours? >> yeah. our friend is not a hotel guy, but the way he talks. and his personality. many details. he wears a heavy dose of cologne. six squirts every morning. >> such as were movies come from. when you make this, people say about you, probably unfair, he

is more interested in characters and the little nuances of relationships, father/son relationships, that is what he cares about. he is not as interested in stories. you do not like that, you do not agree with that? >> the rap i get is more into props that into human -- when i am making movies, what i care about are the characters. and that is what i am into. i do like to make a world for them where we made from our imagination. it is not an invalid criticism. when the as what is the most important, it is the relationship between ray and tony, these two characters. >> the lobby boy.

if you do not have it, you do not have a movie? >> no matter how great the wallpaper is. >> why is that, the setting? the moment? >> i think -- good thing you see the most where we have the square or rectangle in the movie and the faces are a big part of it. the close -- clothes and said that we have this amount of set to communicate whenever feelings and ideas, so i want to work on all of it. >> we have talked about this, too. isn't this about surrogate fatherhood? >> yeah. i am very close to my father. people often ask me because i do these father/son-esque movies. >> you grew up in houston? >> yeah.

along with an always great friendship with my father, i had various mentors and good friends that are 30 years older than i am. and that has been important to me. owen wilson and i -- he is from dallas. went to school together in austin. >> university of texas? >> university of texas. our first movie we did to gather was produced by james l brooks who was our mentor and taught us everything about how to make a script and edit and how to function. to this day, i know i am doing

what i saw jim do in so many situations. i saw him be strong and clear -- i saw him get it. and i said, i see, this is how it is done. those kinds of relationships mean a lot. >> martin scorsese is a great admirer of yours. you know that? >> he has been kind to me. >> he admires you. is there a relationship? >> there's a relationship of me idolizing him. every now and then, he is a person who will screen films and over the years, i have gotten an invitation to see what he is looking at that today. it is always a little master class, two movies.

one of the films i made in india, i made this movie because i went over there as saw this movie called "the river," i had never seen before that martin scorsese was screening. i knew what i wanted to do next. and you know, he has the film a foundation which is one of the most valuable resources into the organization of for this art form ever. >> what are the best shows ever done on this program was when on the death of bellini. -- bellini. -- fellini. the passion for craft and want to share and share the enthusiasm. all of it. >> "wolf of wall street," three-hour movie, all entertaining. you do not think how big it is.

what is basically a comedy of that length that has such power and energy and surprises. every time leonardo dicaprio is talking to us on camera, it is like a jolt of adrenaline. >> let's show where gustav h., lobby boy. that is where they find out they much -- they must go visit a recently deceased hotel guest. just to show you how great the cast is. >> ♪

>> what to do you want? >> dear, god. >> i am terribly sorry. >> she needs to me. how quick can you pack? >> in five minutes. [laughter] >> what did i just see? >> this is two guys, we have ralph, somebody with tremendous craft and the trading and experience and he is talking very, very fast. not too many people who can't take this and blast it and you can understand every word.

he has acted opposite a great kid who has never been in anything. only high school. and the funny thing is on the set of the movie, very quickly, this kid, we forget he has never done this before. he just acts like it is business as usual. not only is it his first movie, he has never even had a job. he is showing up for work every morning. >> did he do quite well? >> he did great. he is quite resilient and charismatic and self-possessed. >> when you write you every movie you ever made you wrote, could you imagine doing somebody else's movie? >> you know -- i, yes, i can. if i have nothing of my own. so far, every time i finish a movie, i have something boring

-- brewing that i really want to do. if i have a period that i do not, i will take something from somebody. >> when you write, do have actors in mind? >> i had ralph. i did not tell him. what i have done and tried in different ways and that was over the years, the best way to get an actor to not want to do the part is to offer it to them. that is the first signal it may not be as good as they thought it was so i'll try to be psychological. i sent ralph a script and said is there a part you like? he has the biggest part, the best part. i sort of edged around it.

>> did he come as gustav h.? >> he claimed the right parts. the rest of the actors, i did not think about them until the script was done. the only time i had this happen. we had everybody that we wanted except for matilda's part that she is 85. originally, we offered it to angela lansbury but she was not able. i love tilda and i said she could be 85. >> do you improve? i think maybe -- the actors describe it as -- for me, when we got on the set to we have prepared everything and we have everything arranged. and they take over. we usually do a lot of things very, very quickly -- one after

another. depending on the kind of scene it is, most of the time we work very fast. they bring a lot of energy to it. it usually feels a little chaotic on the set. i feel like they may not change the lines of but they improvise everything else. how they are going to do it. it usually feels very spontaneous on the set. >> this is a bill murray. he played a concierge. you and bill? >> we have done seven movies together which is a pretty good run. and you know, i have had him in bigger parts and littler parts. and the first one was "rushmore," he is one of the people i got to know. i was such a big fan.

i managed to luck into him doing this first movie. he is a very loyal person. not only have i had the luxury of getting all of these characters to be played by this spectacular actor, but i also have gotten the luxury of having him involved in these movies in a day-to-day way which he brings more than you can expect to be set. he is somebody whose energy is experienced by everybody he works with and he could be a very, very wise person. a great advisor and great friend to have. >> here is the scene. roll tape. >> get in! >> we found the butler. he is hiding out. we will meet at the observatory tomorrow. tell no one.

we will leave in 4.5 minutes. here are the tickets. it was overbooked. the conductor used to be -- he pulled strings. you will need this for the dining car. one last thing. only half an ounce. >> you should get something as a symbolic gesture. how much money do you have? >> bless you. [laughter] >> that is a scene you remember? >> bill, yeah, he has a small role. if you have one part you want to

penetrate and grab people with, he will grab you. >> have you made the movie you most want to make? >> when i first started making movies, i had three or four movies in mind. i had the sequence of moves in mind that i did those. "rushmore," and the one after that. those 4 movies i had in mind when owen and i were in college, together we were working on them in some little form. they existed. everything after that is something from later. i am sort of past all of the movies i felt i needed to make in the beginning. but i have something kind of brewing. i do them one at a time. >> great to have you here. wes anderson. the film is called "the grand

budapest hotel." it opens friday, march 7. ♪

>> this week on "political capital," jeffrey goldberg on his interview with barack obama and the latest on ukraine. julianna goldman talks obama's budget. and paul ryan's plan. >> we start the program with governor rick perry of texas. thank you for joining us.