Kerry-Lavrov talks launch new phase in Syrian chemical weapons crisis

Washington (CNN) — An international crisis over Syria’s chemical weapons entered a critical new phase Thursday as Secretary of State John Kerry launches talks with his Russian counterpart to seek a diplomatic solution instead of threatened military attack by the United States.

The planned two days of meetings in Geneva by full diplomatic teams including weapons experts were considered a litmus test by the Obama administration for whether Russia is serious in pushing its ally Syria to give up hundreds of tons of chemical arms.

Otherwise, President Barack Obama argues for targeted military strikes intended to prevent Syria from being able to repeat what U.S. officials call a major chemical weapons attack on August 21 that killed more than 1,400 people in suburban Damascus.

The challenge facing negotiators was made clear by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who told Russian TV on Thursday that his country would only agree to turn over control of its chemical weapons arsenal when the United States drops its threat to attack.

“This does not mean that Syria will sign these documents, carry out the conditions and that’s it,” al-Assad said, referring to his government’s stated intention to join the Chemical Weapons Convention. “This bilateral process is based, first of all, on the United States stopping its policy of threatening Syria.”

Kerry’s negotiations with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov were intended to forge a resolution on taking control of Syrian chemical weapons that would then go to the U.N. Security Council.

As a permanent member of the Security Council, Russia has so far blocked any U.N. action sought by the United States and European allies against al-Assad’s regime over chemical weapons.

That track record fuels skepticism in the United States over the sincerity of the new Russian proposal for Syria to turn over control of its chemical weapons, with concerns it is a stall tactic to put off a U.S. attack or some other form of international response.

“I have doubts about the motives of the Russians and Assad,” House Speaker John Boehner told reporters Thursday.

U.N. report on Syria coming

Obama also tried to put together a NATO coalition to attack Syria, but Britain’s Parliament voted against taking part, denying the president a normally reliable ally.

He then asked Congress to authorize a military response in Syria, but appeared in danger of losing that vote until the Russian proposal emerged Monday to provide a diplomatic opening.

While Kerry was in Geneva for the negotiations with Lavrov, Obama met with the rest of his Cabinet on Thursday and wished his absent secretary well.

“I am hopeful that the discussions that Secretary Kerry has with Foreign Minister Lavrov as well as some of the other players in this can yield a concrete result,” Obama said. “And I know that he is going to working very hard over the next several days to see what the possibilities are there.”

In some potential good news for Obama, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Thursday that a United Nations report on the August attack in Syria will “probably” be published on Monday, and that there will “certainly be indications” pointing to the origin of the attack.

France and other U.S. allies have said they want any international response on Syria to come under U.N. auspices, and the report by inspectors who traveled to the site of the attack would be a first step toward generating support for a Security Council resolution.

However, Russia’s steadfast opposition to any U.N. action on Syria raises questions about whether the talks in Geneva are merely a stall tactic to put off the U.S. attack Obama is threatening.

Obama makes case for action

The president insists he has the authority to attack Syria without congressional approval, but says he decided to seek the support of legislators for the sake of national unity.

In a speech to the nation on Tuesday night, Obama made moral and strategic arguments for taking action on Syria, challenging Congress and the American public to look at video footage of victims and saying that letting al-Assad get away with it would harm the security of the United States and its allies in the region.

Analysis: Obama a winner or loser on Syria?

Opponents of a U.S. military strike argue that it could lead to another quagmire in someone else’s civil war, and that Obama’s proposal for limited strikes would fail to achieve the objective of eliminating the threat of Syria’s chemical weapons.

Kerry first publicly broached the idea of Syria turning over control of its chemical weapons, responding to a journalist’s question Monday that such a move would avoid a U.S. attack.

In a move that appeared to catch the Obama administration by surprise, Russia then formally proposed putting the Syrian chemical arsenal under international control and al-Assad’s regime said it agreed.

On Thursday, U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq told CNN that Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon received a letter from the Syrian U.N. mission that declared an intention to join the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.

Putin argues against military strike

Russian President Vladimir Putin injected himself into the American debate with an opinion piece on Wednesday on the New York Times website that argued against U.S. military intervention in Syria and implicitly criticized Obama.

The White House shrugged off Putin’s jabs at Obama as “irrelevant,” arguing that Russia’s diplomatic intervention over Syria’s chemical weapons meant that Putin now was “fully invested” in removing them from al-Assad’s control.

Meanwhile, a U.S. official told CNN that CIA-funded weapons have begun flowing to Syrian rebels, as pledged by the administration in June.

The artillery described as light weapons, some anti-tank weapons and ammunition are not American-made, but are funded and organized by the CIA. They started to reach rebels about two weeks ago, the official said.

However, the Syrian National Coalition and the Free Syrian Army fighting the al-Assad regime deny they have received weapons from the United States.

Congress approved supplying weapons to the rebels after the administration asserted earlier this year that the al-Assad regime had used chemical weapons on a small scale.

Before that, Obama had rejected calls by his national security team and members of Congress to increase direct military aid to the rebels.

Those pushing for arming the rebels argue such a step would counter Russian weapons supplied to al-Assad’s forces and strengthen the hand of moderate members of the Syrian opposition, making them less reliant on well-armed Islamic extremist elements within their ranks.

In the interview with Russian TV on Thursday, al-Assad said the United States also must stop arming the rebels for his government to sign on to the global convention banning chemical weapons.