A narrow window of opportunity?

So in the run up to military action in Syria, some interesting developments today. This morning Secretary Kerry, asked what might deter the U S from going forward, suggested that if the Assad regime were to turn over, this week, all of its chemical weapons stockpile to international control, that might do it, while hastening to add that of course Mr. Assad would never do this. Later in the day, Kerry's bluff was called on this very point:  by the Russians, who publicly suggested the Syrians should do that and also sign on to the chemical weapons convention. The Syrian foreign ministry made favorable comments and so did leadership at the UN. 

I am put in mind somehow of the George Aiken strategy for getting out of Vietnam. The then-senator from Vermont said we should declare victory and withdraw. I think there is a narrow window of opportunity to do just that.  The accompanying rhetoric would go something like this:

"In response to international pressure including the threat of immanent military action by te United States, the Syrian government has agreed to take the steps necessary for assuring that it will never in the future have the capacity to use chemical weapons, against its own people or anyone else. The Russians have offered to take an active role in enforcing and implementing the dismantling of Syria's chemical arsenal under UN supervision. Since our objective in the first instance has been to deter and prevent the use of such weapons by sending a strong and unmistakeable message to the regime, we now see that the message has indeed been heard.  We applaud the Russian initiative and will join with them in seeking UN support for supervision of compliance with this action.  We will not, however, accept any delay, and will stand ready to act should this agreement not be quickly finalized and implemented." 

Declare victory -- take credit for creating conditions that led to a diplomatic solution that changes the dynamic on the ground -- and withdraw.  

Of course, as in all such cases, some things would remain unresolved. There would still be a civil war in Syria. There would not necessarily be an admission of responsibility for the August chemical attacks. But the international prohibition on chemical weapons would be strengthened and enforced, and that specific threat reduced.