right now on andrea michelle reports, putin's ploy. secretary john kerry is about to meet with russia's foreign minister about getting rid of syria's chemical weapons, vladimir putin does an op-ed blasting president obama's syrian policy. what does it mean for vladimir, kerry talks that start within the hour. >> i think it's clear the purpose was to weaken our resolve and make sure we would not fulfill our pledge to conduct military action if we have to.

>> that's the discussions that secretary kerry had with foreign minister lavrov as well as make of the other players in this can yield a concrete result. i know he's going to be working very hard over the next several days to see what possibilities are there. >> we'll ask senate foreign relations chairman senator bob menendez for his reaction to putin's snipes. is this a real crack in assad's armor. the syrian dictator tells russian state tv he will give up his chemical weapons after long denying they even existed. plus inside assad's opposition, the commander of the syrian rebel forces explains why they feel abandoned by the u.s.-russian diplomacy.

good day. i'm andrea mitchell in geneva where john kerry is about to open talks with his russian counterpart and trying to find out whether russia is really serious about getting rid of syria's chemical weapons. also how do you square that with vladimir putin's extraordinary op-ed in "new york times" denouncing the president's threat to use force against the regime and insisting the poison gas came from the rebels, not assad. new jersey senator bob menendez chairs foreign relations committee and joins us from capitol hill. senator, thank you very much. we're told that putin has privately been telling the president he knows who was responsible for that attack. lavrov has been talking to secretary kerry. but now you've got vladimir putin writing this op-ed. how did it make you feel? >> well, look, it turned my

stomach. to read all of the elements of putin's op-ed, to suggest that, you know, he has a problem with american exceptionalism, the conduit to the path to peace when he has been the obstacle at the united nations not just to our efforts but the brits, french and others to try to get a peaceful resolution to this as the patron of assad in iran supplying him with tons of weapons. i found it just incredible. even to suggest in other comments that you can expect syria to unilaterally disarm. well, the giving up of chemical weapons is certainly not to be believed as part of the armament of any country. it's internationally prohibited. so i just found it so, you know, incredibly unbelievable. in a democracy we allow views like that to be heard.

>> do you believe secretary kerry is doing the right thing in going ahead with the talks, sort of putting that to the side and choosing to pocket, if you will, syria's private statements they say they have had from both putin and from lavrov? >> well, look, i think that it would be foolish to slam the door on the possible opportunity for diplomacy to achieve a goal, a goal that if russians are serious about would ultimately go beyond degrading assad's ability to deliver chemical weapons, deprive him of chemical weapons which for years he said, until the last few days, said never existed in his possession anyhow. so that would be a positive development. we've got to see what, in fact, is meant by this proposal. is there going to be a binding security resolution, are we going to trust the word of

assad. even if he signs onto the chemical weapons treaty ban, there is no enforcement mechanism under the ban. you're back at the united nations. we have to see how serious the proposal is and whether it has enforcement mechanisms as part of it. >> my reporting is that the russians are holding firm against enforcement mechanism. do you have any concerns that the administration might waiver and go soft on this, or should they hold firm that there has to be some kind of military enforcement mechanism if this is real? >> well, there are different forms of enforcement provisions. a chapter 7 resolution the u.n. provides for the use of force, if the resolution is violated. chapter 6 would provide for sanctions, which would be significant. but there has to be some way in which other than the word of assad saying that he is going to subscribe to the treaty, which

has no actual enforceable elements to it, there's got to be more than that. i don't want to foreclose any possibility but i do want to see an effort that is real at the end of the day. otherwise assad will in time, there's no guarantee he totally comes clean through all of his chemical weapons sites. we have to see what's the plan for destruction of them and what's the timeframe that's involved. the only way to in sure that, seems to me, is some form of security council resolution. if he violates it, you're back on the security council, the russians find themselves in a much more difficult position and the world then convenes and says, wait a minute, we gave diplomacy an opportunity. he finally came clean and he's not moving forward. >> is putin the real winner here? he is driving all of this. it was his proposal. we're responding to it.

his ally, assad, once they get rid of the chemical weapons, they will say what more do you want from us. is this a ploy to keep assad in power and diminish the effectiveness of the opposition. >> i believe, first of all, the only reason that the russians pulled this card at the last minute is because there was a credible use of military force. they believe that not only were we going to attack the ability of assad to degrade and deter his delivery systems of chemical weapons, but that in doing so we actually affected his overall capacity in syria to sustain himself in power. for them that's not an equation they want. they probably think assad can sustain him receives without chemical weapons, give up the chemical weapons. to some degree if we did strike against assad, it might be a concern who gets access to chemical weapons, even if it's

russia, even though they have been helpful to assad in this regards. there's a lot of variable factors here. at the end of the day, the russians must be will put to the test. if after you offer the opportunity, and the opportunity ends up being hollow, i think the russians pay a consequence. we'll see how those dynamics play out. it's not fully an upside for the russians. >> thank you so much senator bob menendez. joining me now from washington, nbc chief white house correspondent and political director and host of msnbc's "the daily rundown" chuck todd. what's been the reaction in the white house. this obama putin relationship has been fraught with drama all along. what is their response to the latest? >> they are being very -- they are not trying -- they are acting as if they don't want to take the bait. they don't want to pick a fight. they are covering ears on the op-ed they don't like and look at the part they do like.

he's owning the plan, what he's calling for in syria. it seems as if they are trying not to get in a spat with putin, as they got caught doing before. it was only a few weeks ago the president called him the board kid in class slouching down. that made putin mad and started this back and forth. it seems as if their attitude today is to ignore the parts of the op-ed they don't like, don't get into a spitball match and embrace the parts they don't like. you take what other people are reacting to, it seems as if everybody in congress is taking offense to it on some level or another. >> this meeting today is being held at the very hoetel where just a few years ago we were with hillary clinton, former secretary of state when she was hitting that reset button with sergey lavrov, trying to reestablish the relationship. that didn't work out so well, did it? >> depends how you look at it.

in hindsight, i talked to plenty of u.s. officials about this during the trip to st. petersburg, actually, andrea, where they say apparently they did have a good relationship, the issue is there's a terrible relationship with putin. purity that in the view of u.s. analysts, putin that basically made the decision after libya, obama has the same view of the world and the view how the u.s. should use the military as bush does. that's how he views it and his mind can't be changed. he didn't like how libya went. so you could look -- the reset worked for a short period of time when medvedev was president. they got the new start, russia and wto. things happened. all of a sudden now with putin back in. it's clear the reset -- what they didn't reset was a relationship with putin.

>> i'm not clear anyone really could. i want to ask you if you could clear up confusion. "the washington post" reported and others reported the weapons finally getting from the cia to the syrian rebels. but the general says not true. >> and a month ago, andrea, you and i both this sources saying the arms have been okayed and they were already on their way. so there's something -- somebody is not being honest somewhere or arms are getting disrupted somewhere because there still seems to be confusion because the same -- we've got plenty of sources telling us that's not the case, wasn't the case a month ago. i'm starting to question about what exactly was right today versus what was right a month ago and i'm sure you're feeling the same way. >> exactly. general got a call from john kerry in the last hour or so trying to reassure him.

they know here, the u.s. officials, that the opposition are really distressed by this u.s.-russian diplomacy on chemical weapons. first of all they want to see punishment for the attack on august 21st and they want to see real support for their opposition. they are afraid this means assad stays forever. >> they thought the u.s. government was going to degrade assad. that was the plan, to degrade his militariable, which would have given the opposition -- they are -- there's a lot of upset folks on the rebel side. >> they wanted airstrikes. chuck todd, thank you very much. we're going to be talking to the general later in the show. meanwhile secretary kerry is set to meet with his russian counterpart. in syria the brutal civil war rage on. richard engel has an exclusive look how al qaeda is increasingly involved with this fight. he spoke with a fighter with the

agreement that nbc news would not show his face. >> translator: if muslims are oppressed, we have to support them. >> united states is considering launching military strikes against syria. would that help you? >> translator: we have a pray, oh, allah please annihilate enemies by other enemies. america is an enemy, assad, let them other. >> you are smiling? why are you so happy. >> this was a dream for me to wage jihad, believe for allah and no other. has it's ups and downs. seasonal... doesn't begin to describe it. my cashflow can literally change with the weather. anything that gives me some breathing room

makes a big difference. the plum card from american express gives your business flexibility. get 1.5% discount for paying early, or up to 60 days to pay without interest, or both each month. i'm nelson gutierrez and i'm a member of the smarter money. this is what membership is. this is what membership does. how can i be a more fun mom? hmmm. can you dance? ♪ bum ba bum ba bum ♪ bum ba bum ba bum no. no? can you make campbell's chicken noodle soup? yes! [ wisest kid ] every can has 32 feet of slurpable noodles. now that's fun. mom, you're awesome. oh yeah! ♪ bum ba bum ba bum [ gong ] [ wisest kid ] m'm! m'm! good! ♪ bum ba bum ba bum

no two people have the same financial goals. pnc investments works with you to understand yours and helps plan for your retirement. talk to a pnc investments financial advisor today. ♪

today's meetings between secretary kerry and russian foreign minister sergey lavrov

are the first step. if they work, in months there may be an agreement, an agreement that will have assad turning over his weapons and having them destroyed. the handover, how likely is that? joining me, a former ambassador -- u.s. ambassador to the united nations to russia and israel. ambassador, very good to see you. we're hearing from the u.n. syria sent the documents over. they are going to sign the chemical weapons treaty and assad said on russian state tv a month after that they will begin getting rid of their weapons under some international umbrella. this is a fast timetable, not at all what was expected as we were flying in here last night. what is your prognosis? you've been at the u.n. and, of course, been in moscow as the ambassador there. >> we will having acceded to the treaty, the u.n., that's what the documents were, it means assad is obliged to get rid of

his weapons in a formal way. that's a help to secretary kerry. i think it's a help to foreign minister lavrov as they talk today about how to implement all of this. >> and how do we verify it? there's a lot of argument, not to be technical, chapter 7, force, mechanisms, wyatt be enough for united states to say we'll go back to u.n. for sanctions where russia and china have vetos to punish syria if they don't comply. >> verification would be done by some verification of units set up to monitor chemical weapons convention which he's acceded. perhaps creation, because this is a big and important effort, of a special u.n. monitoring effort in iraq. that will depend how the parties will go. the enforcement of that that you're talking about will come

through u.n. security council. chapter 7 is a mandatory enforcement action. chapter 6 provides for measures short of the use of military force and sanctions. my own view better to have the use of force out there. the russians haven't shown a notable interest. however, this is an agreement that will be between u.s. and russia to move this ahead. how can they walk away from their own proposal? i would certainly start there, push hard to get that. i think it's important to have the threat of the use of force behind this complicated set of arrangements that have to be worked out in aid of our foreign poll sichlt. >> what is your read on vladimir putin on what some see as a stunt in the "new york times" today. >> i think that was primarily to see what he could do to throw a hand grenade on the efforts of the part of the united states

with the congress to get the backing the president seeks for the use of force. i think it was timed, obviously, to fit in with his effort to see if he could stop the threat of force to use this proposal to dismantle and destroy syrian chemical weapons. we'll have to wait and see. i don't think it's going to have a resounding influence. it was unusual. it was kind of un-putin-like to reach out that far to the american public. a number of pieces of it fell pretty much on sterile ground. >> interesting for putin who has been cracking down on free press to be reaching out to the "new york times" of all things. >> it sure is. he -- >> what about assad. >> i think assad, very interesting, assad said he's responding to russia. but he looks like he's been put into a position where he's going to have to get rid of these

weapons. he doesn't particular like it, i think. they were his big hold card against israel. it is fascinating. a lot of people think putin is winning here. but putin has just had to jettison the most important weapon of his ally in the middle east to see if he can salvage something out of the area. i wouldn't be too sure at this particular juncture that this is necessarily all putin's game. it's interesting. we'll have to watch it. there are a number of difficult things to be resolved. but in many ways the dismantling of his most important weapon and one he seemingly was counting on to bludgeon his own public to recapture important parts of damascus hopefully is now going to be gone. >> in a way does assad win? now he becomes a part of the community of nations. he's agreed with international

verification process. the rebels are not getting the airstrikes they had been counting on. >> well, i think the rebels and airstrikes we were a little bit uncertain whether they were going to be limited or wholesale. what the rebels are getting is getting rid of the most dangerous weapon that could affect them because they don't have the kind of wide scale protection they would need to fight battles against sarin. so i don't think it's a zero issue for the rebels at all. they are also getting assad who, in fact, is now being bullied by his russian protector into doing something he can't be very happy about doing. as i said a moment ago, getting rid of his fiercest weapons. my own sense is this is a little bit of a desperate move to see what they can salvage. in the long run my own sense russian interests are not on assad but position in the middle east, instability in the region, they are to avoid the threat of the use of force because they have no real counter to that.

they can see that, ncin fact, commanding the whole operation. i think as well they will get an opportunity if, in fact, they play ball with this to join the u.s. in creating a step forward in syria, which in my view ought to be followed by a move to the geneva peace process and begin a negotiation which is the one way i believe we have of getting rid of assad. >> ambassador thomas pickering. thank you so much for your expertise. >> thanks, andrea. great to be with you. and earlier on the "today" show savannah guthrie sat down with former cia director and director of defense, he warned it could be another stalling tactic. >> i think we have to be careful and cautious. obviously we have to pursue it. the president wants to pursue it. secretary kerry is there to see

if we can get someplace. i don't think we should kid ourselves. this is going to be tough. the russians have been playing for time with the syrians. this could be a stalling tactic. i do believe we have to set time limits here. we can't just let this drag on. we lowered her fever. you raise her spirits. we tackled your shoulder pain. you make him rookie of the year. we took care of your cold symptoms. you take him on an adventure. tylenol® has been the number 1 doctor recommended brand of pain reliever for over 20 years. but for everything we do, we know you do so much more. tylenol®.

but for everything we do, we know you do so much more. especially today, as people are looking for more low, and no calorie options. that's why on vending machines, we're making it easy for people to know how many calories are in their favorite beverages, before they choose. and we're offering more low calorie options, including over 70 in our innovative coca-cola

free-style dispensers. working with our beverage industry and restaurant partners, we're helping provide choices that make sense for everyone. because when people come together, good things happen.

secretary's kerry's diplomatic mission in geneva has sparked discussions it's consistent. co-host of "in play" nbc white house correspondent peter alexander and nbc capitol hill correspondent kelly o'donnell. welcome all. peter, first to you. how does the white house respond to those that say the president zigzagged use of force, going to congress, delaying, coming here and negotiating with the russians? >> i think the white house is immediately pushing back on that idea. as you heard earlier from senator menendez in your

conversation, andrea, they made it believe it is only this credible threat of military action that brought us to this place for the first time bashar al assad admitted he has chemical weapons, less alone having conversations about his willingness to turn them over. there's a briefing with jay carney, the press secretary that will start sometime electric from now. we've been reaching out to them over the course of the last hour about the fact there's concerns this could be a stalling tactic. russia stead america has to pull the threat of military action off the table now bashar al assad said the u.s. must stop in its words arming terrorists, referring to weapons provided to rebels in that country. one more in the eyes of many people a stalling tactic. that's a great concern this could be the u.s. running around in circles and not making any real progress. >> chris cillizza, the president is where the american people are

in terms of polling. he's looking for a diplomatic solution rather than military action. >> certainly what we know is that the vast majority, i say 60 plus percent in most data i've seen, vast majority of the american public does not want a military action by the u.s. in syria, even with the knowledge that president assad used chemical weapons. so i think what's hard about this, andrea, it was always a difficult case for the president to make. it's a very fine line from a policy and political perspective to walk. on the one hand he's arguing for the moral necessity of punishing syria or ensuring it doesn't happen again. on the one hand he does understand where public opinion is. he said we'll do this but in a limited narrow way. that is a very difficult argument to make to congress. it's a difficult argument to make to the public. i think what you're seeing here is the complexities that go into making an argument like this can lead your critics, and maybe

even some of your allies, to wonder exactly where you come down on it. >> and kelly, what about even the president's own party, not just republican critics but democrats who are not with him on this? >> this has been a really exhausting week for members of capitol hill, because they were sort of at the brink of being forced to make a decision about were they with the president on the initial request for military strikes and now dealing with sort of the diplomatic fallout. on the one hand congress is enormously relieved to not have to be put in the position of putting forward an authorization to use force in sort of the generalized way. clearly there were some people absolutely for that. now when you have the putin remarks, i just talked to senator rand paul who described it as so unhelpful to begin a diplomatic process in this way and have vladimir putin calling names of the president of the united states. he said he had been asked but hadn't thought if he would write

his own response to this. he suggested it was take your mother's advice, don't say anything unless you can say something nice when you're trying to deal with something so delicately raising the questions about can putin be trusted. i think there's a sense of irritation on capitol hill, those who we talked to and those asked members of congress about what putin had written in the "new york times" today and his response to this whole scenario. and there's a sense of being insulted, said john mccain, certainly john boehner as well. mccain referred to insulting the intelligence of the american people. there is just this irritation. at the same time they don't want to say too much to interfere with a process now going forward. lets face it, if it fails, this whole issue of what to do p could fall back. clearly it's been a vote they don't want to have to take. now that they are moving on, they kind of want to see this play out. so they are in a position of not liking what putin said, not liking some of the circumstances

here but not wanting to rock the boat too much. this is what the president and john kerry have to deal with now. congress is trying to pull back just a bit. >> kelly o'donnell, peter alexander, chris cillizza, thank you very much. major news, flash floods near boulder, colorado have washed away home and killed at least three people. the national weather service describes this as a life threatening situation and issued an alert after midnight local time as officials worked to evacuate the area. firefighters brave rushing water to rescue a man partially submerged in a car. they were able to break out a lifejacket and helped him wade through the water to safety. hey linda! what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber!

to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. [ woman ] hop on over! ♪ "first day of my life" by bright eyes ♪ you're not just looking for a house. you're looking for a place for your life to happen. you really love, what would you do?" ♪ [ woman ] i'd be a writer. [ man ] i'd be a baker. [ woman ] i wanna be a pie maker. [ man ] i wanna be a pilot. [ woman ] i'd be an architect. what if i told you someone could pay you and what if that person were you? ♪ when you think about it, isn't that what retirement should be, paying ourselves to do what we love? ♪

♪ we go, go, we don't have to go solo ♪ ♪ fire, fire, you can take me higher ♪ ♪ take me to the mountains, start a revolution ♪ ♪ hold my hand, we can make, we can make a contribution ♪ ♪ brand-new season, keep it in motion ♪ ♪ 'cause the rhyme is the reason ♪ ♪ break through, man, it doesn't matter who you're talking to ♪ [ male announcer ] completely redesigned for whatever you love to do. the all-new nissan versa note. your door to more. ♪

the syrian opposition said they feel betrayed by u.s. negotiations with russia and delay in the strikes against the assad regime. joining me now the commander from syria. general, thank you very much for joining us. i understand secretary kerry called you to try to explain what he's trying to do. he called you from geneva today. what did he say and what is your response? did he satisfy your concerns? >> thank you very much. secretary kerry called me today and told me he was going to geneva to meet sergey lavrov to discuss with him the russian and to know how honest the regime and russians are. he told me if they come to the conclusion they are wasting time, the threat of strikes is

still on the table. that will be an opportunity if they are lying to do the strikes against the regime in damascus. >> u.s. congress and american public opinion were so strongly against airstrikes. do you have concerns, now that the president delayed, do you have concerns it will not happen. he will not be able to go forward with military option on your behalf. >> we hope our friends in the united states and the western country help the syrian people. we know now there's a lot of evidences the regime in damascus and the president used chemical weapons against civilians in syria. it was very clear our last week american friends are going to review the sites. at the end of the day russians

are trying now to find a solution for criminal regime in damascus and they have now reports that chemical weapons and materials in syria and russian console will -- we think that the syrian regime and russian administrations are just playing a game and deciding to win time to delay the strikes. and p if there are any sides in the future, we are preparing our fighters, preparing ourselves for new offensive in all front in syria. doing very well in the northern front and in the eastern front and in the front of homs, we hope to receive military support from our friends. if there are strikes, we welcome these strikes.

we are in most need of these strikes because the regime is very heavily supported by the russians, iranians, fighters. as you know, it is very important for the syrian citizen to put an end to this war in syria. >> thank you general idriss, thank you so much. just now secretary kerry and prime minister lavrov have come out and we'll hear what they have to say. >> translator: this problem will make unnecessary any strike on the syrian arab republic. oom convinced that our american colleagues, as president obama stated, firmly convinced we should follow the peaceful way of the resolution of the conflict in syria. i should say we spoke by phone several times as we prepared for this meeting. we think that the development of

the events gives us an additional opportunity for geneva to in order to move this situation from the stage of military confrontation and to prevent any terrorist expanding in the region and the conference during which the syrian in accordance with the geneva communique should agree on the communication of the transition body has we will have all the executive functions. and this is our common objectives, and i hope that today's and tomorrow's efforts that we're going to continue will help us move on and achieve this objective. that you for your attention. >> thank you very much, mr. lavrov. i want to thank you and your

delegates on behalf of all the people who hope diplomacy can avoid military action. we thank you for coming quickly to geneva in order to have this important conversation we will engain in. over one year ago president obama and president putin directed high-level experts in our governments, both of our governments, to work together to prepare contingencies involving syria's chemical weapons. foreign minister lavrov and i have been in regular contact about this issue since my visit to moscow earlier had year. as foreign minister lavrov said to me in a phone conversation after st. petersburg and the meetings there, president putin and president obama thought it would be worthwhile for us to work together to determine if there was life in this concept. this challenge obviously took on

grave urgency on august 21st when the syrian regime used chemical weapons in a massive and indiscriminate way against its own citizens. president obama and dozens of our partners believe that that action is unacceptable. we have in no uncertain terms made it clear that we cannot allow that to happen again. in light of what has happened, the world wonders and watches closely whether or not the assad regime will live up to its public commitments that it has made to give up their chemical weapons and whether two of the world's most powerful nations can together take a critical step forward in order to hold the regime to its stated promises. i have seen reports that the

syrian regime has suggested that as part of the standard process they ought to have 30 days to submit data on their technical -- on their chemical weapons stockpile. we believe there is nothing standard about this process at this moment because of the way the regime has behaved, because of not only the existence of these weapons but they have been used. and the words of the syrian regime, in our judgment, are simply not enough, which is why we've come here in order to work with the russians and work with sergey lavrov and his delegation here in order to make certain this can be achieved. the united states and russia have had and continue to have our share of disagreements about the situation in syria including

a difference as to the judgment we just offered with respect to may have done that. what's important as we come here is there's much we agree on. we agree on august 21st, syrian men, women, and children died grotesque deaths due to chemical weapons. we agree no one anywhere, any time should employ chemical weapons. we agree together with the international community to eliminate stockpiles of chemical weapons in syria would be a historic moment for the multi-lateral nonproliferation efforts. we agree on those things. we agree it would help to save lives if we can accomplish this, that it would reduce the threat to the regime. it would uphold the norm that

was established here in geneva almost a century ago and it would achieve the best of our -- all of our aspirations curbing weapons of mass destruction. foreign minister lavrov and i have come to geneva today to test these propositions, not just on behalf of each of our countries but on behalf of everybody who is interested in a peaceful resolution. i welcome the distinguished russian delegation. i'm proud at president obama's direction we have a delegation here which i lead of some of our nation's foremost chemical weapons experts. people who dedicate their lives every day to countering the proliferation of these weapons and to bringing back their eventual elimination from this earth.

the russian delegation put some ideas forward. we're grateful for that. we respect it. we've prepared our own principles, any plan accomplishes needs to encompass. expe expectations are high. they are high for the united states. perhaps even more so for russia to deliver on the promise of this moment. this is not a game. i said that to my friend sergey when i talked about it. it has to be real, it has to be comprehensive. it has to be verifiable. it has to be credible. it has to be timely and implemented in a timely fashion. finally, there ought to be consequences if it doesn't take place. diplomacy is and always has been president obama's and this administration's first resort. achieving a peaceful resolution

is clearly preferable to military action. president obama has said that again and again. now, it's too early to tell whether or not these efforts will succeed. but the technical challenges of trying to do this in thcontext e civil war are immense. despite how difficult, with the collaboration of our experts, and only with the compliance from the assad regime, we do believe there is a way to get this done. we have come here to define a potential path forward that we can share with our international partners. together we will test the assad's regime's commitment to follow through on its promises. we are serious -- mr. foreign minister, we are serious, as you are, about engaging in substantive, meaningful

negotiations even as our military maintains its current posture to keep up the pressure on the assad regime. only the credible threat of force and the intervention of president putin and russia based on that has brought the assad regime to acknowledge for the first time that it even has chemical weapons and an arsenal and that it is now prepared to relinquish it. president obama has made clear that should diplomacy fail force might be necessary to deter and degrade assaded capacity to deliver these weapons. it won't get rid of them but could change his willingness to use them. the best thing to do, we agree, is remove them all together. our challenge here in geneva is to test the viability of placing assad's chemical weapons under international control, removing

them from syria, and destroying them forever. but the united states has also made clear that the deaths of more than 100,000 syrians, and the displacement of millions either internally or as refugees remains a stain on the world's conscious. we all need to keep that in mind and deal with it. and that is why foreign minister lavrov and i continue to work with joint special enjoy bra hami under as pizza of foreign communique, mentioned this, we share those hopes that could foster a solution to a civil war that undermines the stability of the region, threatens our own national security interest and compels us to act.

that is our hope and that is what we fervently hope could come out of this meeting and negotiations. thank you very much. >> permission, just two words. two words -- >> translator: i'm not prepared to make an extended political statement today on the syrian problem because our approaches are clear, and they are stated in the statements of the president of the russian federation vladimir putin and in his article in the "new york times," and i'm convinced all of you read this article. i decided not to lay out here our diplomatic position. diplomacy likes silence, and we intend to find compromises. i'm sure that john, in his presentation of the american position, also showed that they would like to find mutual consensus and i hope that we

will achieve all the successes. >> do you want me to take your word for it? it's a little early for that. >> and with handshake, secretary kerry and minister lavrov complete their comments with lavrov interjecting comments about vladimir putin's op-ed in "the new york times." very, very briefly, commander, at this point are you encouraged that this is taking place here in geneva? >> i will tell you that the russian president, putin and lavrov are trying to -- [ indiscernible ]

>> and as i understand it, general, you and the rebel commanders want punishment for the regime for the chemical attack. thank you so much for joining us here today. here with me in geneva is "washington post" political correspondent, my traveling partner and fellow correspondent with the state department. well, what you heard today, this does move the ball -- it opens the game, really. and this is going to be a long negotiating process of arms control. >> yeah, you heard both kerry and lavrov sounding very much like u.s. and russian diplomats of old, talking about arms control, which is something that the united states and russia have spent a long time doing together. you also heard, i think, very

importantly lavrov slip in there a couple things. a question of whether or not it really was assad's forces that did it, and he brought that back again at the end, mentioning, well, you did see what president putin wrote today which included that skepticism. and we also heard kerry say it's only by the threat of force this is happening at all, and we're not backing off from that. so you've got right there crystallized two of the main places where they disagree. >> and with kerry saying that the use of force is still an option, given what the white house has done and the obvious ambivalence of the president and political challenges at home, how credible is kerry's pronouncement on that? >> the russians have to be wondering that. kerry wouldn't be here, in the russian view, if that was really the only thing the united states was interested in doing and they were just, you know, bound for

it no matter what. so there's already a question mark at the end of that sentence. you saw lavrov there saying, we have serious work to do. let's get on about the business of diplomacy, and that should divert any further discussion of this. >> i thought it was very interesting lavrov would bring up putin's op-ed because u.s. officials have been saying is, oh, well that's just putin being putin. you know, we're dealing with lavrov here. they really are serious, but we'll test their seriousness. lavrov was clearly pointing out this is vladimir putin, afterall, and he is the russian leader. >> yeah, i think putin was testing obama's seriousness with his op-ed. >> and in testing obama's seriousness, what does the president now do? this is not going to happen magically. this is going to be a slow process. there's going to be a lot of pressure from john mccain, from others in all corners for more action. >> and you saw kerry say there

you don't get 30 days. it may say, you know, in the covenant somewhere that everybody else signed 80 years ago that you get 30 days to do this, but given the course of events, you don't get 30 days to say, you know, here's what we're going to do. we needed this to happen now. that's the very technical, nitty gritty stuff they're doing here. on the plane with us here were all kinds of people who worked on arms negotiations and disarmament operations as recently as iraq. very technical, specialist experts from across the u.s. government. and the russians brought similar. so they're really having very detailed, technical discussions which both the diplomats alluded to there. >> exactly. two teams, technical experts. this is really the city where arms control began. so there's a lot of history here on all sides. ann, thank you so much for joining us today. >> happy to do it.

>> and that does it for this very special edition of andr"an mitchell reports" from geneva. "news nation" with tamron hall is next. woman: everyone in the nicu -- all the nurses wanted to watch him when he was there 118 days. everything that you thought was important to you changes in light of having a child that needs you every moment. i wouldn't trade him for the world.

who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. if you're caring for a child with special needs, our innovative special care program offers strategies that can help. you feel...squeezed. congested. beat down. crushed. as if the weight of the world is resting on your face. but sudafed gives you maximum strength sinus pressure and pain relief. so you feel free. liberated. released. decongested. open for business. [ inhales, exhales ] [ male announcer ] powerful sinus relief from the #1 pharmacist recommended brand. sudafed. open up.

developing now on "news nation," john kerry's first meeting with russia's foreign minister since arriving in switzerland is happening now. right now as assad issues new conditions and u.s. law make makers react with disgust to vladimir putin's "new york times" op-ed. but we have breaking news to bring you from jay carney. >> -- president putin and his foreign minister, it is clear that president putin has invested his credibility in transferring assad's chemical

weapons to international control and ultimately destroying them. this is significant. russia is assad's patron and protector. the world will note whether russia can follow through on the commitments it's made. as for the editorial, you know, we're not surprised by president putin's words. but the fact is that russia offers a stark contrast that demonstrates why america is exceptional. unlike russia, the united states stands up for democratic values and human rights in our own country and around the world, and we believe that our global security is advanced when children can not be gassed to death by a dictator. it is also worth noting that russia is isolated and alone in blaming the opposition for the chemical weapons attack on august 21st. there is no credible reporting, and we have seen no credible reporting that the opposition has used chemical weapons in syria, and we have been joined by now 34 countries in