Face The Nation Transcripts March 23, 2014: Romney, Durbin, Ayotte

ANNOUNCER: From CBS News in Washington, FACE THE NATION with Bob Schieffer.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Today on FACE THE NATION, breaking news on the missing plane, as new satellite images are discovered; and Mitt Romney speaks out on Ukraine and American leadership. We'll get the latest on the search from our reporter on the scene and veteran pilot Sully Sullenberger and we'll talk to Dave Galo, who led the underwater team that found the wreckage of the Air France plane that had been lost at sea for two years. On Ukraine does Vladimir Putin want more than Crimea? And if he does, what will the West do? We'll talk to Mitt Romney who warned during the campaign about Russian intentions and we'll hear from Democratic Senator Dick Durbin just back from Ukraine and Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte who is there now. Plus, our panel of experts on those stories and the other news of the week ANNOUNCER: From CBS News in Washington, FACE THE NATION with Bob Schieffer.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Today on FACE THE NATION, breaking news on the missing plane as news satellite images are discovered and Mitt Romney speaks out on Ukraine and American leadership. We'll get the latest on the search from our reporter on the scene and veteran pilot Sully Sullenberger and we'll talk to Dave Galo who led the under water team that found the wreckage of the Air France plane that had been lost at sea for two years. On Ukraine, does Vladimir Putin want more than Crimea? And if he does, what will the west do? We'll talk to Mitt Romney who warned during the campaign about Russian intentions and we'll hear from Democratic Senator Dick Durbin just back from Ukraine and Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte who is there now. Plus, our panel of experts on those stories and the other news of the week, sixty years of news because this is FACE THE NATION.

And good morning again, well there is actually some new information this morning on the search for that missing Malaysian plane, new satellite images, these from the French that show objects in the same general vicinity as the earlier satellite images. The search is now focused on an area about the size of Texas, some fifteen hundred miles off the coast of Perth, Australia. Our Holly Williams is in Perth this morning. Holly.

HOLLY WILLIAMS (CBS News Foreign Correspondent): Good morning, Bob. There is now a massive search taking place in the waters of the southern Indian Ocean, but what might be the wreckage of the Malaysian Airlines Flight 370, which has been missing for more than two weeks. Yesterday the Chinese government released a blurry satellite image showing something around seventy feet by forty feet floating in the sea, fifteen hundred miles off Australia's West Coast. That's just eighty miles from where an Australian satellite, spotted two objects last Sunday. One of them is similar size. And the Malaysian authorities said today that a French satellite has also cited debris in the same area. The only possible human sighting so far was yesterday when the pilot of a civilian aircraft reported seeing several objects in the water, including a wooden pallet. Now that's an item commonly used in the cargo hold of passenger planes, but also in shipping containers. Australia Maritime Safety Authority has warned that there is no certainty, but these are the only credible leads in the search for the missing Boeing 777. Today a fleet of military and civilian aircraft from the U.S., Australia, and New Zealand combed a region of the Indian Ocean, the size of West Virginia in difficult weather conditions with lots of cloud cover, radar has proved ineffective. So they are relying on the human eye and they're flying just a few hundred feet over the water. It is extremely challenging work, in seas that are notoriously rough. Now more than half of the passengers on Flight 370 were from China, several Chinese ships are making their way to the search area and two Chinese aircraft will join the operation tomorrow.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right, Holly Williams. Thank you so much, Holly.

And we are joined now by retired U.S. Air captain Sully Sullenberger who made that miraculous landing on the Hudson River five years ago. He's now a CBS News Aviation and sex-- safety contributor. Sully, what do you make of this latest situation? Should we be hopeful about this, these new images that we've seen?

CAPTAIN SULLY SULLENBERGER (CBS News Aviation and Safety Expert): Well, good morning, Bob. Everyone is grasping for any bit of hope they might be able to find. This is an extraordinary circumstance in many ways and with each passing day it makes it more challenging because of the combined effect of wind and current on what floating debris there may be. And if it turns out that this debris is part of the airplane which it might not then, of course, the searchers have to work backwards for several weeks applying in that wind and current information to try to find where on the ocean floor the aircraft may be, if that's where it is. Unfortunately, there were some missteps made very early on. Here we are three-- into the third week of the investigation and just now beginning to re-narrow the search to areas that are still as large as United States-- States so.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, you know, this information keeps coming out in dribs and drabs obviously because some of it we're learning I guess when-- when the searchers find it, but it seems to me some sort of-- there's a problem with communications here. Do you-- do you sense that?

CAPTAIN SULLY SULLENBERGER: And that's not an uncommon circumstance to find in these large endeavors. There are many countries in the world where there is not sufficient coordination between the civilian air traffic control organization and the military, radar, air defense organizations. There's little sharing of information. And then you add to that through regional concerns, suspicion, instability, border disputes, it makes it even harder to mount large scale investigations, large scale searches, that most of these countries can't simply not do by themselves. And if-- if one other good thing comes out of this, it would be more widespread use globally of the Interpol stolen and lost travel documents database. My understanding is currently only the United States, the United Kingdom, and the United Arab Emirates make a one-hundred-percent check of passengers on that SLTD stolen and lost travel documents database and that's something that should be done globally to prevent people from boarding an airplane with a fraudulent travel document.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Is it possible that we're not ever going to know what happened here?

CAPTAIN SULLY SULLENBERGER: Well, unfortunately with the passing time, with each passing hour and day it becomes somewhat more likely that that may be the case or it may take many years. But, hopefully, some floating debris will be found that will be traced back to this airplane and then we can work backwards to find the point where it entered the water and began doing a search on the ocean floor to bring up as much wreckage as can be found, do a forensic analysis of that, and, hopefully, find the digital flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder.

BOB SCHIEFFER: When do you think we'll reach the point where we'll stop searching?

CAPTAIN SULLY SULLENBERGER: It's unlikely that we'll reach that point soon unless there are simply no leads to follow. As we've said it took about two years for the wreckage of Air France 447 to be found in the deep waters of the South Atlantic after the 2009 crash. I think great efforts and huge sums will be expended to find this aircraft and to resolve this huge ambiguity.

BOB SCHIEFFER: If these satellite images prove to be part of the wreckage finding what is beneath the surface is the next step. Sully, we want to thank you for being with us this morning. But finding what's beneath the surface is the next step and there are only a few companies in the world who are able to do that. Dave Gallo who heads up special projects for one of the best, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, is with us here this morning.

DAVID GALLO (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution): Thank you, Bob.

BOB SCHIEFFER: In 2011 nearly two years after Air France Flight 447 crashed off the coast of Brazil, the Woods Hole staff located the wreckage two and a half miles below the surface of the Atlantic Ocean. Special under water vehicles called REMUS 6000s mapped the ocean floor through a process called mowing the lawn. The same vehicles were then able to gather high-resolution photos of the jet's remains leading to the recovery of crucial flight data and the cockpit voice recorders.

Now, Dave, you've been there before. You've done this with the-- with the Air France plane. What happens if the satellite images--

DAVID GALLO: Yeah.

BOB SCHIEFFER: --turn out to be wreckage? What-- what happens next in this search?

DAVID GALLO: Well, then this search turns-- we put it over to a team of scientists using models of the shape of the various pieces of debris can look at the currents, the winds, the waves, tides, all that stuff for the past few weeks and backtrack it. Hopefully, that will give us the X on the ocean where-- to begin under water search.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, I'm told we have the search area narrowed down to about the size of the state of Texas.

DAVID GALLO: Yeah.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Can you start the underwater search when the search area is that big or do you have to narrow it down?

DAVID GALLO: You know, Bob, you-- you could. But we-- we need to have a much better haystack than that. The Air France search was a forty-mile radius circle so it was about five thousand square miles. We're many times that size right now. I mean nothing is impossible but we do need to have some real good foundation for where we begin to look beneath the sea.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, when you locate things beneath the sea using sonar is that the next step?

DAVID GALLO: A sonar, yes, a very-- almost like, we go into that area and do something very akin to plowing a field. Very detailed long lines, we're using a sonar, identify the wreck and then move in with higher resolution equipment.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And then when you start going under water with your special vehicles, what-- what happens then?

DAVID GALLO: Well, then-- then once the wreck is identified you want to almost do a forensic analysis in place using the best cameras, the best robots, it's all the same thing you have to have the right technology, the right team, the right game plan and-- and a little bit of luck, a lot of prayer and then off you go.

BOB SCHIEFFER: I'm-- I'm looking on the screen now we're seeing some-- what exactly is that?

DAVID GALLO: That torpedo-shaped thing you see in its launch pad, it's called the REMUS 6000. It's one of the most sophisticated under water robots on Earth we've got. We used three of those on the Air France survey, search. They cover about twenty-five square miles a day. So it's slow going but the last thing you want to do is go over a spot, miss the aircraft, and then go on to the next spot.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And how far are we from that right now?

DAVID GALLO: It's--

BOB SCHIEFFER: I mean obviously we haven't found it yet.

DAVID GALLO: Yeah, it's frustrating, Bob, because, you know-- and I don't want to hope against the hopes and prayers of the families by hoping this is wreckage from the plane. But we're a ways away, you know. And Air France, it was a two-year process. It wasn't all spent at sea, but a lot of thinking, a lot of-- of things going on, decide who goes and does what next. But, you know, we're at the beginning of that. We're in here for-- it's a long haul from here to there.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And what do you know about the ocean floor at this particular place if it turns out this is where the wreckage is?

DAVID GALLO: The place at it is-- is a horrible place to do any kind of work. It's-- the waters are incredibly rough. I've spent time there in sixty-mile-an-hour winds and thirty-foot waves. But the sea floor beneath is relatively smooth and flat. It's an underwater volcanic mountain range. And it's much simpler to work than the Air France area.

BOB SCHIEFFER: So right now what do you think the chances are that there-- there is something--

DAVID GALLO: I'll put it this way. You know we're looking for some very small needles in a-- in a-- bits of a needle in a very large haystack. But if you have the confidence of the governments, confidence of the families, and again with the right team, the right technologies, nothing is impossible. So I'm confident given those things, it's impossible to say when because we don't know where to start and when to start.

BOB SCHIEFFER: I know you volunteered your help. Has anybody said we need you yet?

DAVID GALLO: Not-- not yet, Bob. So we're in standby mode. We've offered through the State Department and to the Malaysians directly. So we'll-- we'll wait and see.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, thank you so much, David.

DAVID GALLO: You're very welcome.

BOB SCHIEFFER: We'll be back in a moment.

The crisis in Ukraine, this morning, the head of NATO's military command says the Russian forces who are amassed at the eastern border of Ukraine are very, very sizable and very, very ready to use his words. U.S. military estimates put the number of Russian forces at twenty thousand. Former Massachusetts governor and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is joining us to talk about that and other news this morning from San Diego. Good morning, Governor, and welcome back to FACE THE NATION. During the campaign, and I want to start with this, you took a lot of heat for saying that Russia was our greatest geopolitical foe. In the third debate, the President came down pretty hard on you about that.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (2012): A few months ago when you were asked what's the biggest geopolitical threat facing America 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 twenty years.

BOB SCHIEFFER: I'm sure, Governor, you're tempted this morning to say, I told you so, but do you really believe that what happened in Ukraine had anything to do with what President Obama has or hasn't done?

MITT ROMNEY (2012 Republican Presidential Nominee): Well, there's no question, but that the-- the President's naivety with regards to-- to Russia and his faulty judgment about Russia's intentions and objectives has led to a number of foreign policy challenges that we face. And unfortunately not having anticipated Russia's intentions, the President wasn't able to shape the kinds of events that may have been able to prevent the kinds of circumstances that you're seeing in the Ukraine as well as the things that you're seeing in Syria. We-- we really need to understand that Russia has very different interests than ours, this is not fantasy land, this is reality, where they are a geopolitical adversary. They're not our enemy. But they are certainly an adversary on the world stage.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, should we have known this, should we have anticipated it, because it-- it caught a lot of people by surprise it seems to me?

MITT ROMNEY: Well, there may have been some people surprised but there are many, many others who predicted that Russia would try and grab additional territory and certainly when we saw the demonstrations going on in Ukraine, we recognized that Russia has a major base in Sevastopol in Crimea, there was-- couldn't be a surprise to folks that Russia might take the opportunity to grab that territory. After all we-- we see reports saying that the Russian soldiers came in without Russian insignia, that their trucks didn't have Russian insignia, this had been prepared for some time. And we certainly could have taken action early on, we would have had far more options to try and shape events to keep Russia from moving in. For instance, working with our allies-- allies around the world, to develop the sanctions, communicating those to Russia very, very clearly, at the same time saying, look, we're not going to interferes with your base in Sevastopol, nor your influence in Kiev. These kinds of things had the potential of keeping Russia from-- from making a devastating move, one that changes the whole political landscape-- landscape rather, of the entire world and certainly that of Eastern Europe.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, we had put on some sanctions now, they don't seem to have done much good. You're saying if we had done it earlier, how-- how actually would we have done that? And-- and are the sanctions they put on now, do we need stronger sanctions?

MITT ROMNEY: Well, let's-- let's step back. I think effective leaders typically are able to see the future to a certain degree and then try and take actions to shape it in some way. And that's, of course, what this President has failed to do and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as well. They thought resetting relations with Russia, handing out gifts to Russia would somehow make Russia change its objectives. Well, that certainly wasn't the case. Had we from the very beginning of the demonstrations in Crimea, excuse me, in-- in Ukraine, had we worked with our allies and said, look, let's talk about the kinds of severe sanctions we would put in place if Russia were to decide to move and had we then communicated that to Russia beforehand, not put in place the sanctions, but communicate, look, Russia, stand down here. Don't you think about grabbing territory or these are the things that will have to happen. These are the actions we will take. And by the way, Russia, we're not going to interfere with your base in Sevastopol and so forth. Had we communicated those things there is always the potential that we could have kept them from invading a country and annexing it into their own?

BOB SCHIEFFER: So what would be your advice to the President now? What-- what should we be doing now and what do we do next? For example, what are we going to do if Putin decides to move those troops that he's got poised on the border into other parts of Ukraine?

MITT ROMNEY: Well, given the fact that there's a real potential that-- that Russia might be thinking in that direction, we need to communicate with our allies. What actions would we take? Tell Russia before they've acted, say, look, Russia, if you do these things, these are some of the things that are going to happen. And, of course, you keep other options on the table as well. Right now you do the kinds of things that are only available to you after something bad has happened which options are typically far less effective. But you do put in place the sanctions. You do strengthen our relationship with our friends, particularly, in Eastern Europe. You welcome those that seek entry into NATO to join NATO. You rebuild our military budget. You don't shrink our military budget at a time like this. You begin cooperation-- military cooperation with nations in Eastern Europe that want that cooperation. For instance, you reconsider putting in our missile defense system back into the Czech Republic and Poland as we had once planned. And, as you recall, we pull that out as a gift to Russia. Look, these are the kinds of actions you take and the President is taking many of those. I'm saying what he should have done from the very beginning was have the judgment to understand that Russia was not our friend, that Russia had very different ambitions and interests than we did and that you have to stand strong. And by the way, the President's actions in Syria I believe are one of the things that led to the-- the kind of aggressiveness you're seeing from Russia today.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Have we reentered the cold war?

MITT ROMNEY: No, we haven't entered that-- that level of, if you will, cold conflict. But we certainly recognize that-- that Russia has very different interests than ours. That Russia is going to push against us in every possible way. They have been doing it. Look, they-- they blocked for many years the toughest sanctions against Iran. They stand with Assad and Syria. They stand with Kim Jong-un in--in North Korea. They-- they link with some of the world's worst actors. They've sent a --a battleship into the Caribbean and to-- and to Cuba. They-- they harbor Edward Snowden. All-- all these things are designed to say, hey look, we're pushing against United States. They are our geo-political adversary. They're not our enemy but they're an adversary on the playing field of the world. And-- and this is a playing field where we're going to determine whether the world is going to see freedom and-- and economic opportunity or whether the world is going to see authoritarianism and Russia and Putin wants to be an authoritarian and that's not something that the world needs or wants.

MITT ROMNEY: Well, you look and see what's happening in the world and ask yourself after five years of the Obama administration and Secretary Clinton, her administration and now a new secretary of state, who, by the way, I hope does well. But you look over the past five years and say what's happened, good things have not been bursting out all over. The Middle East is in turmoil. Iraq is-- is fragile and-- and may fall back into a devastating setting. We're not making the kind of progress in Afghanistan that had been promised. And our esteem around the world has-- has fallen. I can't think of a-- a major country. It's hard to think of a single country that has greater respect and admiration for America today than it did five years ago when Barack Obama became President. And that's a very sad, unfortunate state of affairs.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Final question, Governor. Have you been thinking, are you thinking about running for President again?

MITT ROMNEY: No, I'm thinking about the people who I want to see running for President. And there's quite a group. I mean we have a very strong field of leaders who could become our nominee and-- and could stand up for the kind of leadership I think America wants. Look, a lot of people are looking back to the 1980s and saying, wouldn't it be nice if we had leaders like Ronald Reagan and George Bush and-- and Jim Bakker and George Shultz and some of the strong Presidents and secretaries of state that-- that led us during very difficult times. That's the kind of leadership we want. I think we have those kinds of leaders in the party and I fully anticipate that I'll be supporting one of them very vigorously.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, thank you so much for joining us and giving your-- your thoughts on all this. Governor, it's nice to see you again.

MITT ROMNEY: Thanks, Bob. Good to be with you.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And later in the broadcast, Democratic Senator Dick Durbin who is just back from Ukraine and Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte who is in Ukraine now. Plus, some personal thoughts for me about these two big stories.

(ANNOUNCEMENTS)

BOB SCHIEFFER: The last time I can remember two such compelling stories competing for our attention was 1997. Bill Clinton was about to make the first State of the Union speech of his second term when word came that a verdict was coming down in O. J. Simpson's civil trial. The nation was mesmerized by anything and everything O. J. And every TV newsroom confronted one question, what do we do if the verdict comes in the middle of the President's speech? Do we cut away and broadcast the verdict? Do we go to split screen with the President on one side and O. J. on the other? Fortunately, the verdict came as the President was winding down so the networks and CNN took a deep breath, stayed with the President, then reported the verdict when the speech ended.

The plane story is a tragedy of unspeakable proportion for the families and a compelling mystery for the rest of us. But our fascination with that should not lull us into underestimating the potential danger of what is unfolding in Ukraine where some untoward even accidental event could literally plunge the world into war. So we will keep you posted on both.

Back in a minute.

(ANNOUNCEMENTS)

BOB SCHIEFFER: And we have a lot more ahead on FACE THE NATION, including the number two Democrat in the Senate Dick Durbin and Senator Kelly Ayotte, who joins us from Kiev. What are their thoughts on the crisis in Ukraine? Stay with us.

(ANNOUNCEMENTS)

BOB SCHIEFFER: Some of our stations are leaving us now but for most of you we'll be right back with a lot more FACE THE NATION, Senators Durbin and Ayotte, plus, our panel with CBS News foreign correspondent Clarissa Ward, Fortune Magazine's Leigh Gallagher and David Sanger of the New York Times. Stay with us.

(ANNOUNCEMENTS)

BOB SCHIEFFER: And welcome back to FACE THE NATION. We are going now to Kiev, Ukraine, where we are joined by Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte who is leading a congressional delegation to the region. Senator, thank you so much for joining us this morning. There seems to be some sort of demonstration going on behind you right now. You're our reporter on the scene.

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE (Armed Services Committee/R-New Hampshire): Thanks, Bob.

BOB SCHIEFFER: What-- what's-- what's up-- what's happening?

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE: In Maidan Square right now, Bob, you see thousands of Ukrainians protesting the Russian occupation of Crimea. So this is a Russian protest by Ukrainians who want their sovereignty. They want their freedom and they're protesting what Russia did in Crimea.

BOB SCHIEFFER: You are just back I understand from a meeting with some of the Ukrainian leaders. What are they telling you about these Russian troops that are poised on the border of Ukraine?

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE: Well, we met with the prime minister. We also met with other ministers of cabinets and, essentially, they're very worried about the Russian amassing of troops on the eastern Ukrainian border. Also yesterday, they arrested three Russian armed agents in eastern Ukraine. And the reason that they are there is to actually create protests, to actually create conflict. And so it was good that they arrested them but you can see the actions that the Russians are trying to take in eastern Ukraine. And so it's so important that we take actions to deter further Russian aggression against the Ukrainian people.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But what actually could we do, in your view, Senator?

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE: Having heard here from the leaders, I think-- I-- I appreciate what the President did this week with sanctions. I think we need to do more with sanctions, including sanctioning the entire financial sectors of the Russian economy as well as looking at the energy sec-- sectors. The Russian economy is a one trick pony. They're totally focused on natural gas and oil. And so if we were to impose greater sanctions on economic sectors, I think we could have a significant impact on Putin and then he would get the message. In addition to that, I think further military assistance, the-- President Yanukovych, the deposed president, essentially, he-- he gutted-- gutted the-- the Ukrainian military and so I think we could provide some more assistance to them in that regard.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, do you think the United States would actually be willing to do that? I mean they asked for military aid and we sent them, as I understand it, military meals for the troops. Should we do more? What kind of military aid do you think we ought to send them?

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE: Well, first of all, I think we could do more in terms of communications equipment that we can help them with, technical assistance. In addition to that, they have put in a request to us and NATO for some small arms. I think there are some things that we could do that don't involve our boots on the ground but really help them also stand up and help their military really at this time. I think that's very important. In addition to that, Bob, you know, we had the USS Truxtun in the Black Sea. I think that needs to be returned to the Black Sea. It was on exercises. It's now been removed. I think we should return it there.

BOB SCHIEFFER: The administration had proposed a huge economic package for Ukraine. But the Senate did not seem to see the-- that this was something needed to be done immediately. You all adjourned and went on vacation. Do you think that you'll get around to passing that aid package this week?

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE: As I understand it, we're going to take up that aid package tomorrow in the Senate. I think it's important that we do this right away. Obviously, they need those loan guarantees. They need our assistance. And in addition to the sanctions that the administration has put forward and I hope that they'll do additional sanctions, this is very important that the Congress do this right away. That was one of the messages that the prime minister certainly gave to us today.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Are they worried that in-- in Kiev that Putin will actually move those troops that are on the border into Ukraine, is that-- is that a worry there now?

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE: I think that's always a consideration and a worry. You see the troops, significant presence he has on the Ukrainian border, you know that the-- the agents, the Russian agents, were arrested yesterday in eastern Ukraine. And that's why it's really important that we turn this around quickly. I think the President has to be-- appreciate what he's done in terms of sanctions but to be even stronger and then also to reassure our allies in the region. Our allies are asking for greater presence of NATO particularly the Poland, the Czech Republic, those countries surrounding Ukraine. So this is a very important time for the United States, I think, also to help turn this around. It's-- it's a wake-up moment in terms of our relationship with Russia and-- so we need to deter Putin from further actions because this is a very real threat, Bob.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you-- could you foresee military forces being put in there, either NATO or U.S. forces or a combination? We are part of NATO, of course.

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE: Of course. I don't see any boots on the ground right now nor are they asking for that. I think that what we can do, though, is strengthen NATO's presence, particularly in the countries surrounding Ukraine. And also provide assistance to the Ukrainian military. But, most importantly, we need to send a message to Vladimir Putin through stronger sanctions. We need him to understand that the sanctions that we put in place can have a significant impact on his economy that we need to deter further action from him. And understand who he is, farmer-- former KGB colonel, he's a bully, and bullies only understand when we punch them in the nose but we need to do that economically. That is our strongest move at this point.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, Senator Ayotte, thank you so much for joining us.

SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE: Thanks so much, Bob. Appreciate it.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And we are joined now by the number two Democrat in the Senate, Dick Durbin. He's in Springfield, Illinois, this morning. He is recently back from Ukraine. Senator Durbin, let me just start to get your reaction to Mitt Romney earlier today on this broadcast when he suggested that the United States should have been warning Putin much earlier than we did, that there would be consequences if he moved in to Crimea and suggested that might have had some impact on what-- what Putin did. Do you agree with that?

SENATOR RICHARD DURBIN (Assistant Majority Leader, D-Illinois/Foreign Relations Committee): Well, Governor Romney had two positions as I understood him. First, if we had shown military force somewhere in the world, it might have discouraged Putin. I disagree and so does history. In the midst of the Vietnam War, when the United States was deeply involved in that war, (INDISTINCT) invaded Czechoslovakia. In the midst of our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Putin invaded the Republic of Georgia. Let's call it for what it is. Here is Vladimir Putin with a failing Soviet franchise. And when he can't win the hearts and minds of his neighboring nations, he uses energy extortion, masked gunmen and barbed wire. Now, he is a bully. And we've got to call him for what he is. But this notion that some sanction is going to stop a formal colonel in the KGB from his ambitions of Russian empire is naive.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, should we have recognized that early on, though?

SENATOR RICHARD DURBIN: Well, the fact of the matter is unilateral sanctions by the United States are good but not sufficient. What the President has done is first, try to negotiate, try to stop the intrigue and the referendum in Crimea. It didn't work. But the good effort was made by Secretary Kerry, by the President, by Angela Merkel and others. Now the President has announced some sanctions from the United States and he's headed over to meet with our allies. When we have a-- an effort made at sanctions involving many other nations it has a potential of greater impact on Russia and discouraging Putin.

BOB SCHIEFFER: One more question about Governor Romney. He says he can't think of a single country in the world where the United States today is held in as high esteem as it was before President Obama became president. What's your response to that?

SENATOR RICHARD DURBIN: Well, he's certainly suffering. He's-- Governor Romney is suffering from political amnesia. Does he remember the reaction of the rest of the world to our invasion of Iraq? The fact is that many of our stalwart allies of the past thought it was a terrible decision. What President Obama has done is restore a working relationship. Osama Bin Laden is gone. The war in Iraq is over. Afghanistan is coming to a close and this president has worked with many of these nations successfully to put pressure on Iran with sanctions, bringing them to the negotiating table. I'm afraid Governor Romney has forgotten those facts.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, let's talk a little bit about sanctions. The President imposed some sanctions. Do you think they have had any impact at this point?

SENATOR RICHARD DURBIN: Well, they certainly rocked the stock market in Russia for a few days and weeks and they-- they might continue to. If Vladimir Putin is conscious and aware of his standing in the world economy, he has to understand this aggression in Crimea is not helping the reputation of Russia as a modern nation where you can do business. He's back to the old Soviet ways and a lot of folks are going to hold back and pull back as a result of it. I think he may have second thoughts.

BOB SCHIEFFER: The Senate's reaction to all of this was to go on vacation when there was a sanction-- package of economic aid that the administration wanted to send to the Ukraine. Do you think you're going to be able to take that up now that you're back from vacation?

SENATOR RICHARD DURBIN: We'll take that up tomorrow. But for the record, Bob, Majority Leader Harry Reid came to the floor ten days ago and called the bipartisan measure that passed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, supported by the Democrats, and John McCain and Bob Corker. There was an objection to passing it by a Republican Senator on the floor, that's a fact. And now we're hearing the House of Representatives may not take up this effort to protect Ukraine unless we add a provision that will protect the Koch brothers from any investigation by the Treasury Department for misuse of campaign funds. I hope that's not the case.

SENATOR RICHARD DURBIN: I think it-- I think it's awful. And Senator McCain and I agree. We need a bipartisan stance by the Senate and by the House as quickly as possible this week in support of Ukraine, in support of sanctions against Russia, in support of a loan to Ukraine so that they can weather this storm as their economy gets back on its feet. Let's not have political intrigue on Capitol Hill undermining our support and our declaration that we stand behind Ukraine.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you think there is going to have to be military aid sent to Ukraine? Should there be? We're sending military food now, the-- the meals--

SENATOR RICHARD DURBIN: (INDISTINCT)

BOB SCHIEFFER: --that we've authorized, but shouldn't it be something more than that or should it be?

SENATOR RICHARD DURBIN: It could be, and I think it should be. John McCain and I sat down along with six other senators with their leadership. They're not asking for American troops nor are we offering them. Kelly was right about that. Senator Ayotte was right about that. But they do need everything from fuel to tires to sleeping bags to meals. This army in Ukraine was devastated by Yanukovych. It is so weak now that there may be six thousand troops ready to go to battle. We've got to strengthen them and help them with advice and back-- backing. And it may come to small arms. I'm not ruling that out. Keep it on the table. For the time being let's help the Ukrainian army get on its feet as a self-defense force.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, Senator, thank you so much for being with us this morning. And we'll be back with our panel in one minute.

(ANNOUNCEMENTS)

BOB SCHIEFFER: And now for some analysis on all of the above CBS News foreign correspondent Clarissa Ward, who was just in both Ukraine and Malaysia, and, of course, before that in Syria, the first reporter to get into Syria and to give us those dramatic eyewitness reports way back. She's in the studio with us this morning, an unusual place for Clarissa to be. David Sanger is the national security correspondent for The New York Times. And we'd like to welcome Leigh Gallagher to the broadcast. She's the assistant managing editor of Fortune Magazine. Well, Clarissa, what is your take and what are you hearing about those Russian troops on the border? Why are they there?

CLARISSA WARD (CBS News Correspondent): Well, at this stage I think they are largely there to-- as a sort of threat, in a sense. A show of force and a threat that at any point in time when Putin decides that Russian troops could go in with very little resistance and take eastern Ukraine as well as Crimea region which they've already taken over. And, you know, three weeks flat. So I think it's more of a threat than it is an actual sort of declaration of an imminent invasion. But I do think that when we're looking at Putin's actions here, we really need to look further into what his point is. Because I think there is a misconception that this is kind of reigniting the Cold War and Putin's a bully. And he's just, you know, sort of lashing out at Ukraine when actually I think that this goes much deeper to that. There is actually a perception in Russia that Russian has been the victim for twenty-five years, that they have suffered enormous humiliation at the hands of the West, and that they have not been allowed to maintain this sphere of influence, that they have seen EU and NATO expansion into Lithuania, into Poland. They've seen U.S. military bases opening in Kyrgyzstan, all parts of the former sort of Soviet empire. So there's a real sense with Ukraine that that is somehow just crossing a line that cannot be crossed, as Putin described Kiev is the mother of Russian cities. These-- the Russian people view Ukraine as an extension of Russia. And so there is a sense that Putin really will do whatever it takes, even in the face of overwhelming, diplomatic, and economic pressure to defend what he sees as Russia's vital interest. And I think when we're trying to understand what's going on in Ukraine we have to keep that in mind. This isn't a simple case of Putin agitating for a fight.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, one of the things that I've learned, maybe everybody in the world knew it, but me, when all of this happened was that in the days before the Czar's Kiev was actually the capital of Russia.

CLARISSA WARD: Absolutely, it was ancient Rus, yes.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Yes. Leigh, we're talking about these sanctions and their impact on the Russian economy. What do you think? Will they have an impact?

LEIGH GALLAGHER (Fortune): I think they have had an impact already. The first round earlier this week was largely symbolic, but the second round that we saw Thursday started to have an impact and have a bite pretty immediately. A couple of examples of that are the Bank Rossiya, which was sanctioned, the only bank itself to be sanctioned. Well, that's where Putin has-- has his money. He can move his money, but MasterCard and Visa immediately stopped doing business and processing the transactions of that bank-- bank's clients. That has an immediate impact on the ground with consumers, ATM transactions, businesses, immediate. And they didn't give any warning. Another example of that would be Gennady Timchenko, who was sanctioned. He owns a company called Gunvor, which is a Swiss-based commodity trading company, billions of contracts and billions of dollars worth of contracts were processed through that, and he had sold his stakes the day before the sanction. But companies all over the world, some of the largest publicly traded companies are looking at that company with a little bit more trepidation and angst, and I think the threat of more sanctions casts appall on anything. The money that's moving out of Russia right now is significant. And I think that just the threat sort of amplifies the impact of the sanctions.

BOB SCHIEFFER: What is the shape of Russia's economy right now?

LEIGH GALLAGHER: It's-- you know, this is a narrative that I think has been lost. It's sort of flown under the radar. But the Russian economy is in crisis mode now. It was in crisis mode before the word Crimea became a household name. Last year growths slowed rather suddenly. The ruble fell, the consumer spending fell off, exports fell, it's-- it's-- it's in a bad place. And now after the crisis, stock has fallen more, the ruble has fallen more, S&P and Fitch Ratings have downgraded Russia's credit rating outlook. And you know this impacts any foreign investment that is going to think about touching Russia is thinking twice. Every risk officer and every corporation is being asked what's your exposure to Russia.

BOB SCHIEFFER: What do you think the impact of this is, David? And what else can the United States do? I mean, what, for example, if Putin does decide to move into eastern Ukraine?

DAVID SANGER (New York Times): Bob, I think that's exactly why you've seen the President hold back some sanctions because he needs a second round, a much bigger round. And I agree with Leigh that the psychological impact of these sanctions that he's announced already has been important. But we learned something in the years in which both the Bush administration and then the Obama administration sanctioned Iran. And that is that Bush had sanctions on Iran that weren't terribly effective. They only actually brought the Iranians to the-- to the negotiating table when they got to the core part of their economy, which, of course, was also oil and gas. And that's what President Obama is holding in reserve here if Putin goes in to the eastern part of Ukraine. The question is will the Europeans go with him. And you know, here the interesting issue is that President Obama has actually been out ahead of his European allies, including Chancellor Merkel in Germany. And when Vice President Biden went on his trip this week to try to shore up some of the allies and give them reassurance, the message he got back was, well, we thank you for showing up, we're with you on sanctions, unless, of course, Putin starts turning off our gas. And they're way too over-dependent on Russian gas. So President Obama doesn't want to go there. Putin probably doesn't want to go there. The big question comes back to what Clarissa said before, about what Putin's real intentions are here because he does believe that he has a historic responsibility to restore at least some Russian pride if not the old Soviet empire, and I don't think he's trying to go back to the full part of the empire. But at the same time I'm not sure he's as sensitive to sanctions as we would all like to think.

CLARISSA WARD: Absolutely. And that, you know, when you look at his approval ratings they are sky high at the moment. The economic sanctions are absolutely going to hurt Russia's economy. They're hurting some of his key inner sanctum. But they are not affecting his political standing. And it's hard to see how they would do so at least, in the short term.

DAVID SANGER: A year from now it might be different picture.

CLARISSA WARD: Well, a year from now might be but right now I think people do forget there is still a lot of nostalgia in Russia for the Soviet Union. There is this kind of utopian sort of misconception of what it was and that they look at it through the vision of these 1960s and seventies sort of Technicolor Soviet musical comedies that they all loved to watch. And so, obviously, they're looking at it with rose-tinted glasses but there's definitely a sense that people are-- are tired of the humiliation that they don't want to be perceived as weak within the international community. And they are, therefore, actually quite grateful to President Putin for reinstating some sense of national pride.

BOB SCHIEFFER: I want to shift just a bit because, Leigh, your magazine had a very interesting story. You picked the top fifty greatest leaders in the world today. I noticed Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees, the shortstop managed to make the list. I noticed that Barack Obama did not make the list. Also-- nor did Vladimir Putin. How did you come up with this list?

LEIGH GALLAGHER: Well, we were really-- this is a new list for us and we really looked at leadership from a-- we looked at leadership this year, we looked for people-- leaders who really changed a paradigm, really disrupted, led in a way that just changed the game. And we looked at a number of exceptional leaders so just because someone is not on this list does not mean we're saying they're not a good leader but, you know, we really looked at real game changers. And there's only one single--

BOB SCHIEFFER: In their specific area?

LEIGH GALLAGHER: --in their sphere, in their endeavor, in their area-- sphere of influence. Exactly. And there's only one sitting head of state on this list and that's Angela Merkel who is going to play a critical role going forward. I do think that if Europe can partner with us and, you know, issue sanctions that are stronger than what it's done already, I think that that could be a real game-changing example of leadership. But, no, it really-- it-- it runs the gamut, you know, we have Angelina Jolie, we have the Dalai Lama. So there's a lot.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And, David, you have a big story in the paper today about the National Security Agency, give us a little brief on that.

DAVID SANGER: Well there's a company, Bob, a Chinese company called Huawei that the United States has long been concerned about. They sell networking equipment and they have been trying to sell in the United States for years. And they have been blocked by the past two administrations from selling most of their equipment because of the fear that once they got to the U.S. it could be a conduit for the Chinese, the People's Liberation Army to get into the networks. What we told readers this morning was that the National Security Agency has been inside Huawei's networks now for several years trying to figure out whether or not they are a PLA front. But also trying to find out whether or not they could use Huawei's networks when they are bought by countries that don't want to buy American equipment, first of all, because they think the NSA is in that-- that equipment so that we can get in to Kenya and Cuba, and many other Huawei customers. So it does give you a sense that this cyber war that's been underway between China and the United States is really a two-way war and it's really accelerating.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, I want to thank all of you for being with us this morning, a fascinating discussion. It's no loss of things to talk about in the world today. So, thank you all for being with us. And we'll be back in just a minute.

(ANNOUNCEMENTS)

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, that is it for us today. So we hope you'll tune in to CBS THIS MORNING tomorrow for the latest on all of these major stories. As for us we'll be back next week with another FACE THE NATION.

*END OF TRANSCRIPT*