for more we are joined by phil litner in geneva. phil, in some ways it's very particular and some ways it's a bit vague too. tell us more about this agreement. >> well, richelle, this is the agreement here and it was released a couple of hours ago. as you mentioned there are a lot of things that are left unsaid in this proposal. it really specifies how to gain control of the chemical weapons stockpile in syria. it doesn't place blame on the assad regime for the attacks on the 21st of august which sparked this crisis. it doesn't clearly say that if the assad regime doesn't comply with these stipulations that there will be military action. there are many things that are left vague because basically the russians and the americans couldn't come to a middle ground on some very contentious issues. nevertheless they have actually come about as close to being on the same page as could be expected. and it does appear as though they are speaking with a unified voice when it comes to the chemical weapons stockpile and how the international comm

for more we are joined by phil litner who is in geneva. phil this is the beginning of a very long process while they seem to arrive at this fairly quickly, implementation is something completely different. we have to still dissect what this means, what the implications of this agreement are. >> well, yeah, richelle. i mean as you say, this is just the beginning of a very long process. this is not the end. it may have been three days and after a couple of weeks of crisis but we are now looking at a lengthy process of trying to secure a large stock people, perhaps the world's largest stockpile of chemical weapons, inside a country that's in the midst of a bloody civil war so you know how do we achieve that? that's been one of the issues that's been discussed here and both sides of the equation here, the russians and the americans say there is a -- there is a way to do it. it will be fraught with dangers. it will not be easy to do put it is possible. there remains a number of discrepancies between the two sides but in the agreement today they

. >> for the latest on the plan to strip syria of its chemical weapons, let's go to phil litner in paris. why have the meeting take place in paris? >> >> it's making place in paris because the french have been all along one of the proponents of a military strike in syria, and that has been a huge boost to the white house in their efforts to force the assad regime to the negotiating tables. an interesting shift. normally the british are the first to step up alongside the americans with military support, but because the government of david cameron lost that vote in the house of commons, the british are not in any way, shape or form going to contributing military asset to say anything in syria. interesting to see william hague here, the british foreign secretary, but nevertheless, it's being held in paris, because basically, the french were the ones that were going to go along with any kind of strike. >> you mentioned the some of it in the nato alliance. what will this group push for as the best alternative if this deal doesn't work? >> that's what a lot of these talks, the bulk of the talk

let's move to aljazeera's phil litner in syria. how is that affecting the talks rewarding syria today? >> well, that's an interesting development. how much that will affect the talks here, well, i'm not really sure, because we still have a huge gap between the russians and the united states. the russians are saying the fact that syria has agreed to sign on to that chemical weapons convention is enough for the global community to take away the threat of a military strike. the u.s. still stands by its position, that the syrians only sign or greed to sign that, and agreed to give up their weapons because there is the threat of a military strike, so to take that away would take away the syrian incentive to do that. the envoy to syria spoke about a possible reassumption of peace talks. frankly, unless this chemical weapons issue is resolved here, that political process is going to have an even harder time of succeeding. >> so, this is the million dollar question. where do we go from here, phil, what now? [ scoffs ] >> that is absolutely