Syria crisis: Russia calls on Assad to destroy chemical arsenal. A US-Russian Deal?? Something is Being Cooked for Sure.

From the Guardian:

"....
One of many questions surrounding the big news this morning that Russia has called on Assad to destroy his chemical arsenal – an astounding development, considering that a week ago president Putin was denying evidence of a chemical attack – is, to what extent the Russians are working with US secretary of state John Kerry and other US diplomats on the issue.

The timing of Lavrov's announcement– a few hours after Kerry said that Assad could resolve the crisis by surrendering control of "every single bit" of his arsenal to the international community by the end of the week, and a few days after Putin and Obama met at the G20 summit – seems to suggest coordination of some kind.
Lavrov played the announcement as Russia taking the US up on an offer to avoid strikes in exchange for the weapons' elimination – not, it should be noted, an offer that Kerry explicitly made....."

From an Earlier Post by Brian Whitaker

".....

The world has made considerable progress towards eliminating chemical weapons and the aim should be not to let that slip by allowing their use to become normalised now. There are two steps towards achieving that in Syria:

1. Preventing any further use.

2. Holding accountable whoever was responsible.

Of the two, preventing further attacks is plainly the most urgent. Accountability is important too, but if a way can be found to prevent further use, accountability could be set aside for a later date.

If the immediate issue can be narrowed down to one of prevention, and the UN inspectors produce irrefutable evidence that banned weapons have been used, Putin might – just might – be open to persuasion.

So, what might be done? One idea, from US Senator Joe Manchin, is to give Assad 45 days to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention and begin securing and ridding the country of its weapons stockpiles. 

Couched in those terms – basically as an ultimatum – it’s unlikely to work. Russian wouldn’t support it and Assad would probably respond by calling on Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a quid pro quo. – which isn’t going to happen, desirable though it might be.

Nevertheless, there’s the germ of an idea here. Another option would be for the UN to call on Assad to hand over his chemical weapons for safe-keeping outside Syria, with inspections to ensure there was no further production.

It’s certainly worth testing whether Russia would agree to that. Assad would still be reluctant, since he maintains that his chemical weapons are a national defence against Israel’s nuclear weapons. But with Russia's cooperation he might just be persuadable that clinging on to his stockpile is more trouble than it's worth."