tavis: good evening. from los angeles, i am tavis smiley. tonight with russia taking over crimea and as president obama begins his meeting with world leaders at the hague, we get an assessment at how important this country can be with brooke jones, the author of the timely "still ours to leave." then we turn to a conversation with actors dule hill and james roday. we are glad you can join us. those conversations are coming up right now. ♪

>> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> with russia grabbing crimea and western leaders traveling to determine how to respond, international policy once again comes into focus. at theector on strategy

brookings institution has written a timely new text that looks into america's role as a coalition builder entitled "still ours to leave." jones also holds major appointments at stanford and in why you. good to have you on this program. what a timely text this is indeed. the conversation too much, your thoughts on what we see happening in crimea. >> this is a critical test for american leadership and for the west. you use a key phase about coalition building. there are certain things the united states can do by themselves about crimea, but it's in a much stronger position if we can galvanize the western alliance, if we can galvanize the europeans and keep the chinese and indian from into

support of of russia in this context. tavis: that means there has to be some respect for the authority of the u.s., for the style of leadership we employ when it comes to building coalitions. it means evil got to see our ability to lead in the world, if that's still the case. >> i think it is. there has been a lot of talk about american withdrawal from the world, but when we see an acute crisis like this immediately everyone is looking at washington to see what washington will do. everyone is looking at washington to lead. tavis: the flip side is when the u.s. stands up and says, here's what we are going to do, it doesn't automatically lead to results. >> and never have. byte of the cold war when we were the leade -- at the height thehe cold war when we were leader of the free world, it still didn't work that way.

time and doesn't always succeed. >> i could talk about ukraine and crimea. i could talk about syria and other places where barack obama has had a lot of potshots taken at him over his inability to lead were wishy-washy nests -- washiness.wishy- there have been shot fired at the president. some of them legitimate. many of them illegitimate. the question is whether we have a crisis in this particular white house or whether the country has found itself in a place historically where people are looking at the leadership of our nation. >> let me say a couple of things. one thing we do in the book is theto make a deeper look at fundamentals. my conclusion is the united states is going to be an enduring power on the international stage now and sometime to come, by far the

most influential actor on the stage. my feeling of trying to get a handle on america's own thinking of the world is everyone understands we have to get engaged in the world. people are gun shy. they understand we don't want to get in new wars. a crisis like in ukraine this is not going to be a military action, but it is going to take the united states using every lever of its power and coalition building to try to contain russia and reverse this. be an you can both enduring power and at the same time a power viewed as dogmatic and domineering. just because you are and during doesn't mean you are respected. >> i make the point the united states has to lead and not to dominate. there has been a longtime one week conflated the idea of

leadership with military action. military action is an important part, but by itself it's not enough. that is the broader engagement, the coalition building. the key ingredients of american power, especially when large parts of the country are held by people who are not u.s. allies. tavis: what does that mean for the future? >> it means we have to spend a lot of our time and energy building relationships with those countries. it's really interesting when you travel to beijing, when you travel to these places, they have a mix of interest. in part they would like to challenge us. they would like to assert themselves on an international stage, but they know their red is buttered on the side of stability, and they cannot achieve that without the united states, so there is a lot to work with there. quite, do you think our military power should take a backseat to soft power? >> i'm never a big fan of the

face soft power, but i use the phrase coalition will power. let's take a look at asia. we still have china and japan. our military presence is an important deterrent for china becoming more aggressive, but it's not the leave factor. china works with us on energy issues. -- it's not the only factor. it's a balance that put the united states in a strong position. >> do you think our military power is a deterrent? i was troubled when this syria thing kicked off in the last year. the washington opinion was that it was the military threat that -- put syriaroad on the road to looking at it a certain way. the argument was the military crisis.elped deter this

it seems to me it wasn't necessarily the military threat as much as it was the conversation, getting on a playing field where diplomats could have their say. maybe it's not either/or. that's a long way of getting at whether we really do believe our factor is a deterrent. >> our military power is still really important in these conversations. part of why diplomacy works is the alternative is military power and people don't want to go there, so that creates an incentive for diplomacy. it the old carrots and sticks. the deeper point i think is there are a lot of places where we actually do have shared interest. even with a country like russia. we have an interest in cleaning up chemical weapons in syria.

the military option has to be the very last option. this notion ofut american exceptionalism as you see it? the first thing i thought is the age-old question about american exceptionalism. where'd you come down on fat these days? was i have never been a big fan of the phrase. -- where'd you come down on that these days? >> i have never been a big fan of the phrase. a lot of people were upset with us in india, brazil, europe, germany, and everywhere else. i don't think that anybody turns around and says, that means i would much rather be close to china or russia, so by the standards of great powers, there is something different about american power. we have decided historically to set up the way we use american power to try to build these

coalitions, to try to build these alliances from a to and onefree trade, irony is we spent a long time thinking about the rise of china and india. ofs a very different kind power. there are some exceptions. sometimes we use our power in more unilateral ways. we certainly know rivalry. the question is whether we know constraint. leading from behind, but when that phrase was put out, he was roundly criticized and not just i fox news. we know rivalry, but do we have to learn restraint these days? >> i think that's an important part of the equation. we put sanctions on russia. you already saw today china, india, brazil, south africa. they weren't supported russia,

but they were worried about those sanctions. they're worried about the united states using financial sanctions against a non-western power because they are also full durable to this. we have to be careful about how we put this. we have to learn some restraint as well. >> when you say the world is still hours to lead, on the flipside they make this argument, this notion of whether they call it isolationism that we are not the world police, and you argue it is still hours to lead. >> we have never been the world's police in that we don't lead everywhere, but we play a big role in asia and europe, and we have special forces running around in northern uganda, trying to hunt down some of the most atrocious figures. there are times when they challenge that. there are times when they resent

it, but there are also times when they recognize that role helps keep things more stable than they would be otherwise. the part of our diplomacy and the part of our politics that has been underutilized is coalition building. we haven't done enough to build the opportunities we have with china. there are tensions and difficulties but a lot of opportunities right now. we have been neglecting our european allies until this crisis. the military capability will be there. i would much rather we build the coalitions. when we have to use them we will use them. you think the, american people want us to lead, or do they want us to mind our business and take care of business here at home? >> they want us to lead, but they want us to lead successfully. >> the book is called "still written by bruce

jones at the brookings institution. andng up, a dule hill james roday say goodbye to "psych." television series rarely survive eight years of the ratings battle field, but "psych" has done just that. they put the once fledgling usa network on the map. they will wrap their run. joining us now are the two men most responsible for the success of the series. let's take a look at a scene from the farewell episode with guest star meera sorvino. >> found it. i am a little confused as to what will fit in this spot. >> this is where we come in.

this is ideal for a standard sized pirates chest. >> that's ridiculous. the ground is dead. it's obvious our guys searched for and found the fountain of youth. >> you are not counting for the lost city of atlanta. >> one of them was yours. >> you are kidding, right? >> can we see that there is a chance that our digger is not 100 years old? >> that seems reasonable. tavis: eight years. the long run. let me do that again. >> don't talk about it. good run. tavis: what are you guys going to do when you are around each other every day?

>> we text a lot. to be tough. we became fixtures in each other's lives. like its. blankets. >> that's like going to high school and college with one of your best friends. >> memo top of that you took every class together and you studied together. tavis: let me be serious for half a second. what does it mean to be on this journey with somebody? if the two of you. it's not even like all whole have been like this for eight years of your life. >> it's like being in a romantic relationship without any of the perks. the same things happen. you start finishing each other's

sentences. you start knowing the other person's habits. you know what they eat. you know what they drink. bromance. -- in the beginning we connected over our love of 80's songs, and it's spring boarded from there. >> i got a much closer than i ever thought i would to a jamaican. >> he probably knows more about jamaica than i do. this, what's great about you guys helped put the network on the map, so you deserve credit for that. the flipside is the network did something most networks don't do these days, which is give the showtime to find its audience. >> that's true. when i first read the script i thought it was a hilarious show if the network gave it a chance to find its legs. i am grateful usa did that. most of the times if you don't hit right away -- >> i have said for many years it

was a line. it needed to be usa. it needed to be 2006. it needed to be us. it needed to be the rest of the were in a bubble doing our own things and no one was meddling. all of those elements have to be in place. would you do me a solid and pass me that metal mug? [laughter] that's why i think it's so rare. all those things have to be in place to go on the journey we went on. >> it's lightning striking in a bottle. tavis: i have never been to vancouver, but there is something about being able to go there and to focus on the work. beenuch has been vancouver a character in the success story? isone thing about the show it was not airing in vancouver, which was a good thing also.

it allowed us to go to work. we had nothing to do but to go to work and get back home. >> dule would get looks because he was a brother, not because people knew who he was. people were always surprised. we did our thing. no one bothered us. it was great. tavis: the other thing fans of this show appreciate -- our producer as well. >> she is a psycho. >> you said that. >> in a good way. >> self proclaimed. what we were talking about before the show is the episode, especially the music stuff. you guys didn't just do a series every week for eight years, but you got a chance to have some fun, doing pretty outrageous, crazy stuff. >> once we got our sea legs under us, we discovered as long

as we killed somebody every week and pinned it on somebody by the end of the show, we could go wherever we want and happen to any world we wanted. we could bring in guest stars we admired from the time we were kids. it turned into a buffet of who do we want to work with and what do we want to do as long as we solve a murder every week? early shows was american duos. that really represented when we really started to define this is what the show is. we were off camera cracking each other up. >> we would come up with our version of the tears for fears song shout if it had been a tears for fears michael jackson shout out. we almost wasted it on the credits, and for whatever reason we did not do it and were able

to plug it into that episode with a full-fledged production value, him dressed as michael, me dressed as rolen. accident. thaty was one of the broader swings we have taken, and when it worked, or as far as we were concerned, it gave us a push to be like, what else can we do? tavis: i will take your phrase a happy accident. how much of what we saw started with you guys acting foolishly off-camera and the writers were somehow convinced -- >> i think a lot of them. a lot of the interactions. that's what makes the writer so brilliant. they would do certain things. we would drop into an episode, and they would run with it. thelled rodeo over to dressing room. -- nextng he is going

thing you know ed is showing up. >> coming back and playing a bailiff. tavis: when you are in this moment, you have got this eight-year run. everyone is working. you are grateful to be working on a hit show on a network that supports the show. do you ever think of the future in terms of typecast? two i want to stay in this thing so long it puts me in a box where i think i can't get out of it? or was that never a concern? >> i am always going to be playing a black guy. usa, it's not like we were getting pointed 2 million viewers. it was big for cable but not in terms of network television. i'm not that concerned about

being typecast. >> we were a cold show. as long as our hard-core psychos are willing to accept us as other people, it stands to reason a lot of other people might be discovering us for the first time. speaking of cold following, -- cold following, -- what do young, think the viewers connected to that work for you? obviously, you guys had fun. the viewers had fun. >> i think steve franks who is a viewer and deserve the town of ofdit taps into the idea taking a procedural show. a lot of people love law and order and csi and turning it and taking it so you get the element but you also get the laughs. you get to have fun. i think we came along at the time when the country needed to laugh.

that's what we did. once we realize we were doing something and people were responding to it, we kept trying harder and harder, and i think people may be started laughing harder and harder. you can look at the tv landscape now. it's very specific. you can see a show where someone's head is chopped off or it's a procedural or a kids show. >> or people are having sex in roman times. you could sit down with the family and watch a tv show, and you all would laugh. crazy how many times people would pull us aside and say, this is the only show i can sit in the same room with my 16-year-old and connect over. then he goes back to watching -- greatest that the compliment? >> bringing families together.

psyched for eight years. tavis: what's next? >> i made a film this past year that it took me the entire run to make. i was doing the show and peddling this movie, and i finally got it done, and dule actually appears in the film. the name of the film is gravy, and it's in the comedy the festival on april 1. it will be the first time anyone can see it, and i am excited about it. tavis: i am coming to new york in a couple weeks to see you. singingl be on broadway some cab calloway and all those kinds of things. >> it's absolutely delightful. >> you will start smiling immediately, and you will not stop. i am looking forward to it. >> no problem.

last shot on the way out. what a ride it has been. congratulations. you as always. i will see you soon. that's our show for tonight. inc. for watching. as always, keep the faith. -- thanks for watching. >> for more information on today's show, visit tavis smiley at pbs.org. tavis: hi, i'm tavis smiley. br esajoin me next time for a -- join me next time with the former secretary of labor robert rice. that's next time. we will see you then. ♪

>> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> be more. pbs. ♪

hello and welcome to "this is us." i'm becca king reed, this week we are downtown in santa cruz at marine's' cannies. the marine's family has been making candy and other sweet treats for about 100 years and today they are going to show us how they make the tasty confections and how they stay on candy's cutting edge. we will meet other foodies. forced to flee his home land in 1975, this chef has been hailed by criticisms as the best vietnamese dining experience in america. and the best young international chef in the world who is from right here in santa cruz. and finally, what's food without music? greg kin told us house -- tells us how his brief cryerer career as a -- career as a chart