crimea was a little different. one thing we need to understand but crimea, i have liberal russian friends for whom the crimea siege was the right thing to do. crimea was russian from catherine the great. then, and 54 they gave crimea to ukraine as a symbol of ukrainian russian friendship. but it was all the soviet union. so they say when it became independent they should have given it back and we said that's not the way it works. it is a violation of international law and we can never recognize the russian annexation of crimea. but we need to be aware among russians is not an unpopular thing to have done. it actually added to putin's popularity. but he can be stopped. you have to be firm. >> was put in charge, if i recall correctly you are fairly pessimistic about russia itself with putin in charge. i assume there's no hope for democratic institutions to thrive with him in charge. >> he managed to systematic dismantle those institutions. when you think about institutional design you want an executive that is not so

so much so the us made him a target of sanctions after the invasion of crimea.e left the railway two years ago. is he still a true believer in the putin project? vladimiryakunin, welcome to hardtalk. hello. i think it's fair to say, you, for a decade more, were one of vladimir putin's closest associates and advisers. in general terms, as you look at putin's impact upon russia, would you say that you believe he is taking russia in a very positive direction? thank you for your introduction. listen, to tell the truth, i never considered myself a voice to be in the position to be considered an adviser of mr putin. i was doing my business, i was ceo, i was the head of the project, that is true, but i never was the adviser, to either the prime minister or the president of the russian federation. as far as your question is concerned, i suppose that is the knowledge and i suppose the reference is to the poll showing that people in russia believe that his execution of power was in favour of development of russia. interesting that... nobody is above criticism, of course,

crimea was a little different and one of the things that we have to understand about crimea.i have a lot of liberal russian friends for whom the crimea seizure was the right thing to do. crimea was from katherine the great and gave crimea to ukraine as symbol of friendship, it didn't matter it was all the soviet union. when my liberal russian friends said when it became independent, they should have given it back. that's not the way it works. it's a violation of international law and we can never recognize the soviet -- the russian annexation of crimea but we need to be aware that among russians it's not an unpopular thing to have done but it actually added to putin's popularity, but he can be stopped. you just have to be pretty firm. >> last russia question, with putin in charge in russia, i think -- if i recall correctly, you're pessimistic about russia with putin in charge, there's absolutely no hope whatsoever for democrat institutions to thrive in russia with him in charge. >> the sad thing is that he dismantled institutions. when you think about institutional design, wh

reiterating france will not recognize russia's annexation of crimea. he says he doesn't want to talk for the sake of talking. he wants concrete results and tangible progress. he wants progress. he's going to propose withdrawal of troops. he's going to propose that tangible results can be shown. >> he wants this format of talks to happen before the g 20 summit in early july. >> it's a tall order. he is trying to strike a pragmatic note. these talks are essentially in a stalemate right now. even as the conflict on the ground is still very much an ongoing firing across the demarcation line. to resolve that conflict have been dead in the water. he wants to convene this before the g 20. we are talking hamburg next week. it's a very tight time frame. the emphasis is to get everyone around the table. he was pretty tough with vladimir putin. we don't know what he said to him behind the scenes. said russia had invaded ukraine. he's not going to give much slack to either side. be tough with the ukrainians and russians. >> on the domestic front in he wanted to cl

crimea was a little bit different and things that we have to understand about crimea, i have a lot of liberal russian friends for whom the crimea was the right thing to do. crimea was russian from katherine the great. and then in 1954 -- [inaudible conversations] gave crimea to ukraine as a symbol of ukrainian russian friendship so my liberal russian friends say when it became independent they should have given it back. we say well no, that's not the way it works. international look it's a violation of international law. and we can never recognize the soviet, russian -- of crimea but we need to be aware among russians it is not an unpopular thing to have done, and so it actually added to putin's popularity. but he can be stopped. it is you have to be pretty firm. >> last russia question. with putin in charge in russia, i think -- if i recall correctly pessimistic about russia itself with putin in charge. i presume absolutely no hope whatsoever for democrat institutions to be with russia in charge. >> sad thing had is what he managed to systemly dismantle those institutions when you th

government is saying that crimea is part of ukraine. so the public statements have shifted to being apart from vladim vladim vladim vladimir putin, no they are not friends. they have spoken on the phone three times. the last strongest thing we may have heard trump say in favor of putin is that we might be able to have a relationship. and that was pretty much the end omp it. and the russians know that politically it's not as if there's going to be a warming there any time soon. >> you know, hillary clinton talked about the russia investigation yesterday. and i'm wondering, you know, chris, what was your -- what did you think of what she said? she mentioned all of it. she said of course it hurt her. what did you -- that's a timing issue as well. >> yeah, so she's writing a book. some of it is to drum up interest in the book. i think the sbinterview yesterd on up west coast was odd. what hillary clinton said, look, it's not campaign, i take the blame but my mistakes aren't why we lost and she goes to detail a number of things that without

did you make a mistake in crimea? you didn't answer my question. >> i'm anne-marie green.morning news." you make a mistake in crim crimea? you didn't answer my question. >> i'm anne-marie green. this is the "cbs morning news." so when it comes to pain relievers, why put up with just part of a day? aleve, live whole not part. tell you what, i'll give it to you for half off. this i can do, easily. i try hard to get a great shape. benefiber® healthy shape is a clear, taste-free, 100% natural daily fiber... that's clinically proven to help me feel fuller longer. benefiber® healthy shape. this i can do! i can't keep up with our dearweekly tee times.worry but i've been taking osteo bi flex ease. it's 80% smaller, but just as effective at supporting range of motion and shows improved joint comfort in seven days. which means you're in big trouble, son. you will bow to my exquisite short game. cower at my majestic drives. i will make you question everything, son. so don't worry about dad's joints. worry about your dignity. love, dad. 80% smaller, just as effective. osteo bi-flex ea

they were imposed as a protest against russia's annexation of crimea from ukraine back in 2014.s moscow criticized the u.s., ukraine's president was in washington with the u.s. president. he held talks with u.s. president donald trump in the white house. he described america as one of his nations's most reliab source -- nation's most reliable allies. trump called the talks very good discussions. concerns over russian aggression have prompted nato to prepare r the worst, vasion of eastern europe by moscow. led by germany and the u.s., alliance members are taking part in military exercises in the media. for the first time, they are focusing on lithuania's border with poland. russia is expected to carryut its own exercises i september simulating an armed conflict with nato. nato secretary-general attended the wargames today. speaking to dw's terry schultz, he said the increased nato presence in the region is because of recent russian aggression. he also addressed u.s. concerns that russia ha europe has not bg its weight when it comes to collective defens. >> we are standing i lithu

question i mean you know that all the sanctions that are put on russia are put on russia because of crimea but realistically speaking you're a very smart man you know i know everyone knows that no amount of sanctions especially at this point is going to make russia give up crimea so what's the point of the sanctions are this sanctions of principle look i was it was not a decision of the commission because decisions as you know in europe in terms of them foreign policy are the responsibility of all the states member states not old commission but the ones in the u.p.a. and summit where do the seasons were taken. so i remember very well what was the reason for the sanctions. and the reason was the following. the countries thought that it was very serious what happened between russia and ukraine . ukraine member of matted nations a smaller country compared to russia so and there was a sentiment that the international law been violated. and so do you peel country says to react what could be do. military option of course not that's not an option thanks ago nobody wants to come back to do wars. b

>> the same mod us op rand day in crimea.annexation of crimea how dare you accuse me i am a man of peace. later a denial. the russians maybe some are patriots. a few months later, a tacit approval. how could you let these people fight alone? and eventually, full recognition, bragging and pinning medals russian troops troops part of the invasion. >> how do does this play in russia? do people believe what he is saying. >> it's a tricky game because he has to send two messages one to the world he doesn't care if -- if people -- if he is caught lying because as he said after he recognized crimea invasion that fooling fool the world was part of the game. but he has to send a message to russian people while he denies he demonstrates i just twisting words that he was part of the operation because he has to show that he is so powerful he can interfere in american elections defy the united states and that protects him in russia against any kind of palace coup or attempt to overthroe him. >> he also said there is no way hackers or anyb

charlie: when we went into crimea, we said either you leave or else. what did the else mean? mr. burns: the else is a tough question. crimea and ukraine was a fundamental interest for lots of russians, so he was not going to back down. he was likely to double down. charlie: the conversations i have had with him were somewhat lengthy. she talks about those people who speak russian, who are no longer within russia. mr. burns: right, and he has this sense -- and it is true of the number of russians and the political elite -- that you ought to have a deferential ukraine, deferential to russian interests area but if you can't have that, the next best thing is a dysfunctional ukraine -- russian interests. but if you can't have bad, the next best thing according to putin is a dysfunctional ukraine. charlie: but should we recognize a differential relationship between ukraine and russia? mr. burns: no, i think of ukraine, i think the fundamental point of international order is that ukrainians ought to be able to make their own choices. they should not be subordinate to another power. of c

in 2014 they took crimea and are in eastern ukraine now. is the u.s. policy that that is unlawful and was still unlawful in those territories in georgia must be returned to georgia to crimea in eastern ukraine be returned or are we just going to accept the russian invasion of those territories? the last thing i mentioned is pakistan. i think pakistan is a play in this. we give them money. that money is up in the batter hands of bad guys. i personally think that pakistan should not get any american money. they get 500 million a year not count the military. they should be designated as a spencstate sponsor of terror and should be removed from the major non- nato ally status at the have. i know this is been a discussion for years. they tried to get pakistan on board to do the right thing. i what are we going to do, heard your comments earlier. are any of those things i mentioned options. iran, russia, pakistan and i will let you comment on that. >> are policies under development, it has not yet been presented to the president. i will tell you that we reco

we -- we make it clear that we will not recognize crimea's annexation of ukraine, that we will continue to stand with the people of ukraine with regards to their sovereignty and we asked for a plan to reduce ukraine's dependence on russia energy imports. we know ukraine is vulnerable because of energy and we have to develop a plan to deal with that. there are many members involved with that. i would acknowledge my friend from ohio, senator portman, for his work in regards to the ukraine provisions. there's new counterterrorism financing provisions, pretty comprehensive so we make sure we have all the tools we need in order to track the financing of terrorism activities, and that's in there. mr. president, let me tell you how proud i am to be associated with the underlining bill as well as the amendment that we're going to vote on at 2:00. both the underlining bill and the amendment was developed in the best of the bipartisan manners of the united states senate, and i want to thank again all those that were involved to give us this opportunity to speak with a strong united voice against

and the continued russian occupation of crimea and eastern ukraine. why would the trump white house ever even consider easing sanctions against russia? >> i'm not aware of that. so everything i know is that we will have said we're going to keep our sanctions strong and tough when it comes to the issue in ukraine. i've said it publicly. we'll continue to say that. there's no easing up on russia until they start becoming part of the minsk agreement. we think russia meddled in the election. i think congress is dealing with that. and we'll see what happens. >> you're not aware of it, but it did happen. the white house didn't dispute the report and the former state department official dannel reed has stated on the record this happened. there's been a lot of talk and reporting about jared kushner, the president's son-in-law and senior advisor trying to establish back-channel communications to russia. are you aware of those? >> no. i was not aware of any of that if it happened. there's so many rumors back and forth. i think it's the reason that the investiga

crimea as well as eastern ukraine be returned to ukraine. or we just going to accept the russian invasion of those t territories? and the last thing i want to mention is pakistan. i think pakistan is playing us. we guf them money. that money ends up in the hands of bad guys who hurt americans. personally i think that pakistan should not get any american money. they get $500 million a year not counting the military. they should be designated as a state sponsor of terror. and they also should be removed from the major non-nato ally status that they have. but i know this has been a discussion for years to try to get pakistan on board to do the right thing. they don't. what are we going to do? i heard your comments earlier. is any of those things that i mentioned an option? so iran, russia, pakistan, and i'll let you comment on that. >> well, our iranian policy is under development. it's not yet been delivered to the president. but i would tell you that we certainly recognize iran's continued destabilizing in the region. their payment of foreign

it is still in crimea, still in parts of eastern ukraine.are watching a stale mate here, which way is this going to break? which threats concern you most? >> if obama had confronted putin over crimea and ukraine and provided them with assistance they wanted, putin is never in syria. he came to syria, he knew that nobody but nobody was going to stand in his way of achieving that end, that is where he is, a huge strategic asset in that airbase, he is leveraging airspace in middle east, a new president in went to middle east, said i got your back, spoke to the allies in one room, said strategic threat are iranians and we'll stand against the that, i see as we move down the road as trump and putin move down the road, some kind of confrontation, necessarily a conflict but a confrontation. lou: do you believe this is say positive sign for the trump administration and policies here is pursuing that the iranians have been quiet and far less provocative than previously? >> yes, but the iranians run the war in syria, their generals are on the ground.

and i think helped prevent putin from overreaching even further beyond crimea. so i think that was a sensible response. but this is going to require long-term firmness and vij lens because i think our relationship with putin's russia is likely to be adversarial for some time to come. >> what if we had said when we went into crimea, either you leave or else whatever else. >> well, the else is a tough question then. because i think for putin, crimea and ukraine was a kind of very fundamental interest for lots of russians. he wasn't going to back down. he was most likely to double down there. >> even the, that is two conversations i have had with him. some were lengthy. i mean he talks about those people who speak russian. >> right. >> rose: who are no longer within russia. >> right. and he has this sense, and it's true of a number of russians in the political elite that you ought to have a deferential ukraine, and if you can't have that, the next best thing from putin's point of view is a disfunctional ukraine. >> rose: should we recognize-- i mean clearly we ough

those who did it is they feel russia did not respect the borders of ukraine, and that it annexed crimea illegally and unfairly. and there is a question now as you know about whether the sanctions should be lift order not. and your take on whether it's time. >> translator: indeed, this issue affects us directly. but there is one thing i would like to say this. is the first time i attend this kind of forum, and i have been foll following this dialogue with great interest. i've been listening quite thoroughly how you moderate the style, and i can see that critical journalism is very well alive. as for your question, i think we have to be sensible. as for the sanctions, russia has violated international law. if the same thing happens in the european, we ge together. we have a discussion, ahen we make a decision. since our country is part of the european integration process, we have to stick to the sanctions. but let me say clearly to you austria has suffered a lot because of the sanctions. they had a huge impact according to our estimates around. not .3% of our gdp was lost because of the s

russia wast time, premium -- keep crimea. do we really have protection here against what appears to be an aggressive intent from russia? host: mississippi, john is a democrat. good morning. caller: i wanted to swing back to the infrastructure issue. i have a comment or a request for ayesha rascoe and paul singer. i saw an article in the washington post in the last several days about terms if a structure plan and it is very different from what people expect. my request of your guests is pitch in would try to public with how the system works? we pay taxes when we buy gasoline and that money goes into a trust fund for the highway. built, theneed to be federal government financed 90% and the state finance 10%. and it is put out for bid. trump is planning on flipping that and i lived in a state that would be a will to afford infrastructure. and he is talking about private-public partnerships. aich basically privatize this contracting system which will create quite an increase -- quite an increase in user cost. so you will pay told

has enabled and tried to cover up crimes in syria, it has invaded ukraine, it has illegally annexed crimea, it has attacked and interfered with our democracy. enough is enough. that is why i urge this body to adopt russian sanctions as part of senate s. 722. sadly and dangerously our president has proven time and again unwilling to hold vladimir putin accountable. congress must ensure that he does so. it must ensure that russia receives a clear, unequivocal signal that this measure -- senator cardin's counter acting russian hostility act and the russian sanctions review act and that they are adopted by this body. those measures are critical to sending a message that we will hold russia accountable for its interference in our elections, its annexation of crimea as well as its violation of the i. n.f. treaty. i can expect nothing short of including these russian bills to move forward to a final vote. i will support s. 722, but i believe that there is a track and a path for this body to do both and we must do it. the imposition of mandatory sanctions codifying former president obama's executi

producer for deliberate assholes i sit here and i like that but there are very good out there come from crimea but i look at nature out that it's such a kind. but the end of all the things that may. get us up and i was told so i messed. up the minute i. got it but there was something i think best. economic development is all about numbers so we're really pleased to report this quarter we are one hundred six points. but what do we know about the other figures. when i think about the fact that our c.e.o. mike do. over a twenty million dollars last year more than one thousand times the average wal-mart is says he had. with all due respect i have to say i don't think that's right. is that just how a free market would. people went from pretty simple financial lives pre nine hundred eighty to the point now where people are. just totally submerged in their financial accounts and they're all in debt and what exactly devoid society. the part of the government tried to do it wasn't necessarily making. it might be making things worse. by saying this is not how capitalism works this is goes hopelessly dis

more than 50,000 troops in crimea plus 40,000 troops, local militiamen. this is a huge contingent which is more than the army of many european countries. this is very simple situation. putin is a president of the country who is an aggressor of my country. if you ask me if i trust putin, no, i don't trust him. >> bret: still don't trust him. >> we have now after a year a better understanding of the situation. putin, very important, strong message for us that the biggest tragedy of the 20th century for him was the collapse of the soviet union. he now tried to undertake the enormous efforts, tried to rebuild russian empire or renew the soviet union. we don't give him one tiny single thing. the last two months, we received, the ukrainian nation, 45 million people received a visa-free for european union, and that was the final farewell to the russian empire. and president putin. >> bret: how many russian troops, russian militiamen if you want to call them, are still in your country? do you know? >> exactly be -- because we have an exchange with intelligence da

who promote ukrainian independence and nationalists they've never seen, some of them believe that crimea should not be part of the ukraine and again, anyone -- everyone says that democracy should prevail. that ukraine should be a federation and he shares the same values. but given this he promotes very good relations with russia. it might not be a union but again, we need to have a good level of economic integration. he says that it's really embarrassing to destroy the shared energy, shared infrastructure, networks, financial and industrial cooperation networks. translator: this is embarrassing. it would be expedient to have cooperation like this. so, he speaks on behalf of of the people. he feels that these are the interests of the people is not alone so, we have got this call with the person who said that he is in kiev and he takes part in the events to commemorate the memory of our forefathers. he is of the same opinion. he believes that we need to take care of the legacy and to build on that wonderful legacy. he's been helping the exchange of prisoners on behalf of the president of u

who, i guess, were also 400-pound-artists waking up in their beds and painting the annexation of crimea because they felt like it, they started appearing on the crimean peninsula in east ukraine, and putin issued blanket denial after blanket denial saying these are not russian soldiers. they're just local volunteers who feel passionately about the cause. then a couple years later a documentary comes out on the main russian news channel owned by the kremlin, which is essentially like a two-hour interview with putin, where he said, yeah, of course they were russian soldiers. what, are you kidding me? i did that. >> so you think that will happen eventually. >> yes, absolutely. >> natasha, what was your reaction? >> it was classic putin. i mean this is something he's been doing all along like julia said. he did it in eastern ukraine. he said it was president the russian state that intervened. it was patriotic russians that wanted to fight on behalf of the separatist movement. >> it was almost exactly the same language he used to describe what they were doing there. >> exactly. but the thing

in putin's calculation, the costs of the sanctions do not outweigh the benefits of occupying crimea and contributing to unrest in the ukraine, to continuing to support the assad regime's assault on civilians in syria and conducting cyber attacks on people and companies and institutions around the globe. many of us on both sides of the aisle feel that the united states needs to be much stronger in its response. americans want to see the united states stand firm in the defense of our long-held values, which include respect for territorial integrity, human rights and liberty. at this point, the only way to change putin's cost-benefit analysis is to increase the pressure which we applied directly through sanctions. the crapo-brown-corker-cardin amendment is an effective way to increase the pressure on russia for its irresponsible conduct. our legislation signals to the world the united states' unflagging commitment to the sanctity of territorial integrity, human rights, and good governance. our amendment also demonstrates our resolve in responding to cyber attacks against the united states

the obama administration triggered largely by the invasion of eastern ukraine and the annexation of crimeathings could only get better. and there was syria also on the table. but that is not what i think this was about. charlie: what do you think this was about? lionel: i think that mr. trump has a different, not, again, we didn't have a long discussion about what he thought about vladimir putin, but he along with strategists feel there is a way of resetting relations with russia. russia is a very important geopolitical player. why not start again? what were they getting in return? what guarantees on future behavior, conduct? and that is incredibly unclear. charlie: mark has there been any , allegations that he has done something illegal, rather than simply being questionable, and secondly, against the precedent of previous administrations? mark: no. there is not yet anything to suggest that there was anything illegal about these conversations, about having the meetings. in and of itself, setting up a secret channel, while it is unusual during a transition, is in and of itself not illegal.

we would lift the sanctions except for those on crimea and the ones on crimea we would lift when the russians got out. we took the sanctions in order to lift them, but not just to lift them in exchange for russian actions. >> you were former chief u.s. coordinator for sanctions policy among your other many stints at the state. give us a sense of how unusual this approach is for sanctions policy and if you know, were there efforts like this to relieve sanctions in russia on any other country in which you describe as that early period? >> whenever we place sanctions we do so to change behavior. if the behavior changes, we rescind the sanctions. the purpose of sanctions isn't to be about themselves. it's to get the other guy to do something. and in this case what we wanted the other guy to do, that being president putin and his government, was to pull out of ukraine and allow the ukrainians to run their own country. what was troubling about these stories is that suddenly i was hearing that we were preparing to rescind sanctions in exchange for, well, nothing. >> for nothing. >> that str

i didn't know the crimea speech that he gave too. these are points that we don't hear in the west. i have never seen an interpretation of his in the western media. of the ukraine. >> rose: qatar, washington and russia when we continue. funding for charlie rose is provided by the following: bank of america, life better connected. >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: we begin in the middle east and with the gulf states. last week five middle eastern states egypt, saudi arabia, united arab emirates and yemen severed ties with qatar. the goal was to isolate them for their alleged support of terrorism. the standoff put the u.s. in a difficult position since both sides of the dispute are american allies and because the united states has ten thousand troops based in qatar. the state department offered to negotiate a resolution but so far it has not been accepted. joining me for a discussion about this is hamad bin jassim bin jaber

not only crimea and georgia, but georgia has interfered. and i think syria is a place.ascinating, the look on putin's face when he tried to tell oliver stone that it's our policy, we don't interfere in other elections. >> oliver stone on cbs this morning, he said, it remains to be seen whether russia interfered. they did with our election. they did. >> the other thing that's important to recognize when wondering about the relations between the trump administration and the trump campaign and russia is that in america, we have a lot of opposition. weapon don't jail opposition politicians for holding protests. it's a distinction we must not lose sight of. >> this is one of the most recent issues alexei's run into. >>> in the next hour, the attorneys general of the district of colombia and maryland are expected to file a lawsuit against the president over his global business empire. "the washington post" reports that this morning that the suit alleges that the president has violated anti-corruption clauses in the constitution by accenting millions in payments and benefits f

two years ago i was in romania shortly after the russians took crimea and they were freaked out. the question being, will the united states and europe come to our defense as the russians sort of creep towards our border. and at the time, the americans under president obama basically shrugged their shoulders and let russia have crimea. now of course sanctions are imposed and other rattling of sabres is done, but i think the europeans and again, like i said, the closer you get to the russian border, the more your tension rises. do we really have protection here against what appears to be an aggressive intent from russia. >> hadiesburg, mississippi, john is a democrat. good morning. >> caller: good morning. i wanted to swing back to the infrastructure issue and i have a comment or request for miss rosco and mr. singer. i saw an article in "the washington post" just in the last several days about trump's infrastructure plan, and it's very different from, i think, what people expect. and my request of your guests is that they would try to educate the public, how the system works. typi

for example, when they invaded crimea and seized crimea he said the local militia was responsibility no russian invasion, a month later there was an russian invasion and didn't we do a great job, same thing aibts eastern ukraine, denied it and then said they're russian military there but they're volunteers. syria, he's lied over and over again saying they're there to fight isis when they're there to save assad. the shoot down of the airliner over ukraine by the russian separatists which he blamed on ukrainians and they came up with all kinds of excuses, you know, one after another, putin comes up with the big lie but then again, there's sometimes a kernel of truth in what he says. you know, we don't do what it is that the russian government did in terms of meddling radically in our elections to try to decrease confidence in democracy and, you know, help donald trump. >> all right. kevin, in terms of big lie/little lie, morsel of truth, i want to share a bit more of what vladimir putin had to say, specifically about having information or dirt, damaging stuff on the president? >> you h