The Syrian government's apparent acceptance of a Russian proposal for Syria to acknowledge its chemical weapons and place them under international control has recast the ongoing debates over how to respond to an August 21 chemical weapons attack and bring an end to the Syrian civil war. Other parties including Senator Richard Lugar had proposed a U.S.-Russian-facilitated disarmament initiative prior to the announcement. On September 10, Syrian officials signaled their willingness "to disclose the locations of chemical weapons, to stop producing them, and to reveal these locations to representatives of Russia, other states, and the United Nations" with the goal of "ending our possession of all chemical weapons." On September 12, in an interview on Russian television, President Asad reportedly said that "Syria is placing its chemical weapons under international control because of Russia. The U.S. threats did not influence the decision." President Asad also stated that his government will be sending documents "in the next few days" to the United Nations for joining the international convention that bans the use of chemical munitions. Speaking in a national address on September 10, President Barack Obama said: ... over the last few days, we've seen some encouraging signs, in part because of the credible threat of U.S. military action, as well as constructive talks that I had with President Putin. The Russian government has indicated a willingness to join with the international community in pushing Assad to give up his chemical weapons. The Assad regime has now admitted that it has these weapons and even said they'd join the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits their use. It's too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments, but this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad's strongest allies. I have therefore asked the leaders of Congress to postpone a vote to authorize the use of force while we pursue this diplomatic path. I'm sending Secretary of State John Kerry to meet his Russian counterpart on Thursday, and I will continue my own discussions with President Putin. I've spoken to the leaders of two of our closest allies -- France and the United Kingdom -- and we will work together in consultation with Russia and China to put forward a resolution at the U.N. Security Council requiring Assad to give up his chemical weapons and to ultimately destroy them under international control. President Obama and senior members of his Administration continue to seek authorization from Congress for a limited use of military force against the Asad regime while exploring the potential for the establishment of international control over Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles and related elements of its chemical weapons program. The governments of China, the United Kingdom, and France have responded favorably to the proposal, and, as of September 11, Russia had rejected a French plan for a binding United Nations Security Council resolution that could be enforced with military action. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov are scheduled to meet in Geneva, Switzerland, on September 12 to discuss the proposal further. Some Syrian rebel leaders have rejected the proposal and characterized it as a delaying tactic while maintaining their calls for international assistance and punishment of the Syrian government. On August 30, the Obama Administration presented intelligence analysis stating with "high confidence" that the Syrian government was responsible for an August 21 chemical weapons attack against civilians in rebel-held areas of the suburbs of Damascus. The Syrian government continues to categorically deny any responsibility for any chemical weapons attack. President Obama called the Syrian government's reported use of chemical weapons "an assault on human dignity" that "presents a serious danger to our national security." He further requested that Congress authorize the use of force for military operations "against Syrian regime targets" to "hold the Assad regime accountable for their use of chemical weapons, deter this kind of behavior, and degrade their capacity to carry it out." According to the President, such military operations would be "limited in duration and scope" and "would not put boots on the ground." In the wake of the Russian disarmament proposal, President Obama requested that lawmakers pause in their formal consideration of proposed legislation to authorize the use of force in Syria. Nevertheless, debate continues among Members of Congress about the pros and cons of proposed authorization approaches as well as the disarmament proposal now under discussion. President Obama has stated his view that "the credible threat of U.S. military action" contributed to the emergence of the disarmament initiative, and has underscored that he has "ordered our military to maintain their current posture to keep the pressure on Assad and to be in a position to respond if diplomacy fails." A draft resolution authorizing the use of force submitted to Congress by the White House would authorize the President: to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in connection with the use of chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in the conflict in Syria in order to – (1) prevent or deter the use or proliferation (including the transfer to terrorist groups or other state or non-state actors), within, to or from Syria, of any weapons of mass destruction, including chemical or biological weapons or components of or materials used in such weapons; or (2) protect the United States and its allies and partners against the threat posed by such weapons. Lawmakers in the Senate and House are considering alternative authorization proposals, amid concerns that the Administration's proposed text may not sufficiently limit the scope or duration of any potential military response. Others reportedly are drafting proposals that would reflect the disarmament proposal under consideration and could seek to make an authorization for the use of U.S. military force contingent on the satisfaction of criteria related to the enforcement of a disarmament agreement. On September 4, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee debated and adopted an alternative resolution authorizing the use of military force for specific purposes, including to deter further use of chemical weapons and to prevent the transfer to terrorist groups or other state or non-state actors within Syria of any weapons of mass destruction. The provision would limit the deployment of U.S. forces on the ground for "combat operations" but may not constrain the deployment of U.S. forces in Syria for other purposes. As of September 11, the House had not formally considered an alternative authorization proposal, although some Members had circulated draft proposals or introduced measures that would restrict the availability of funds for U.S. military operations or support for opposition groups in Syria. In Syria, the brutal civil war continues, even as Syrian government forces were reported to be taking measures to prepare for potential U.S.-led military operations against them. President Bashar al Asad has stated that the United States and others accusing it of carrying out chemical weapons strikes have not presented any evidence to support their allegations, and he has warned that external military intervention in Syria's civil war risks igniting a regional conflict. U.S. military officials have confirmed that the Syrian government has taken steps to prepare for potential attacks, but as of September 10, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey testified that "The indications are, today, that [Syria's chemical weapons capability] does remain under the firm control of the regime." Syrian officials have requested that the United Nations Security Council act to prevent aggression against Syria. Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamene'i, has said that a U.S. attack on Syria would be a "disaster for the region." There have been similar statements from other senior Iranian leaders, but these leaders have not threatened that Iran itself would conduct any retaliation. Iranian Revolutionary Guard Commander Major General Mohammed Ali Jafari has stated that, "The U.S. imagination about limited military intervention in Syria is merely an illusion, as reactions will be coming from beyond Syria's borders." Russian and Chinese officials remain opposed to the U.S. proposal for punitive military strikes, while the Arab League has modified its original position insisting on United Nations Security Council action to call for the Security Council and the international community to "take the deterrent and necessary measures against the culprits of this crime for which the Syrian regime bears responsibility." The Arab League has welcomed the Russian disarmament proposal, but Arab League Secretary General Nabil al Arabi has emphasized that the group remains focused on punishment for the August 21 incident and international action to bring an end to the civil war. United Kingdom leaders stated prior to the Russian proposal that they have no intention of seeking new authorization from Parliament to participate in any international military operation following Parliament's rejection of a measure to do so. French government officials have proposed measures to implement the Russian proposal and presented supporting intelligence on September 2 to French legislators concerning what they describe as "the massive use of chemical agents" by Syrian government forces. U.S. military assets remain in place in the vicinity of Syria. As of September 2, five guided missile destroyers were reported to be deployed in the eastern Mediterranean Sea: the USS Stout , USS Gravely , USS Mahan , USS Barry , and USS Ramage . The USS San Antonio , carrying forces from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, and unspecified attack submarines also were reported to be nearby. The USS Kearsarge and the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier strike group were reported to be deploying westward toward the Red Sea. In announcing his decision that punitive military action was required on August 31, President Obama stated, "I'm comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security Council that, so far, has been completely paralyzed and unwilling to hold Asad accountable." President Obama also said, "I believe I have the authority to carry out this military action without specific congressional authorization." The war in Syria and the debate over possible punitive U.S. military action against the Asad regime for its alleged use of chemical weapons pose a uniquely challenging series of questions for policy makers. The overarching questions remain how to define, prioritize, and secure the core interests of the United States with regard to Syria's complex civil war.