US President Barack Obama was forced to defend the deal made with Syria over chemical weapons after the Assad government hailed it as a "victory".
The Russian-brokered agreement calls on Syrian president Bashar al-Assad to account for his chemical stockpile within a week and allow for international inspections by the middle of next year.
But while it was welcomed by Israel, Iran and China yesterday, Obama faced criticism at home from Republicans over the likelihood of the Syrian government complying without threat of force.
Meanwhile, the first Syrian official to comment, Ali Haidar, greeted the deal, saying: "These agreements ... are a victory for Syria, achieved thanks to our Russian friends."
Minister of National Reconciliation Mr Haidar is part of the Syrian government, though not close to Assad.
He said Syria welcomed the terms of the US-Russia deal, adding: "They have prevented a war against Syria by denying a pretext to those who wanted to unleash it."
He also echoed US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Kremlin counterpart, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, in saying it might help Syrians "sit round one table to settle their internal problems".
But rebels, calling the international focus on poison gas a sideshow, dismissed the suggestion that the arms agreement might herald peace talks and said Assad had stepped up his conventional offensive now that the threat of US air strikes has receded.
Air attacks, shelling and raids on the suburbs of Damascus yesterday backed up predictions from supporters and opponents of Assad alike that he would resume the offensive after a lull in which his troops took up defensive positions in expectation of US strikes.
Foreign Secretary William Hague, who described the deal as a "significant step forward", will fly out to Paris today where he will be briefed by Mr Kerry on the agreement hammered out on Saturday following three days of talks in Geneva.
Mr Kerry responded to widespread scepticism about the plan by insisting that it had "the full ability" to remove all Syria's chemical weapons. Mr Kerry stressed that force remains an option if Assad reneges - and US forces will remain in position.
Although welcoming Saturday's deal, international responses to the accord have also been guarded.
Western governments, wary of Assad and mindful of the frustrating years UN weapons inspectors spent in Iraq, have noted the logistical difficulties in destroying one of the world's largest chemical arsenals in the midst of civil war.
Assad's key sponsor Iran hailed a US retreat from "extremist behaviour" and welcomed its "rationality". China, which like Russia opposes US readiness to use force in other sovereign states, was glad of the renewed role for the UN Security Council, on which Beijing too has a veto.
The Syrian government has formally told the UN it will adhere to a treaty banning chemical weapons.
Israel, worried that US leniency toward Assad may encourage Tehran to develop nuclear arms, said the deal would be judged on results.
Mr Kerry assured Israel the chemical weapons pact would be effective. "We cannot have hollow words in the conduct of international affairs, because that affects all other issues, whether Iran or North Korea or others," Mr Kerry said after talks with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Mr Kerry had earlier briefed Mr Netanyahu on what he called "the most far-reaching chemical weapons removal ever".
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article