The primary significance of U.S. President Barack Obama's decision to ask Congress to approve military action against Syria represents a new window of opportunity for resolving the Syria crisis. Instead of preparing to launch Tomahawk missiles, the U.S. will prepare its pens and draft agreements.

The U.S. Congress is expected to convene on September 9, more than a week away. Writing a bill and holding preliminary talks ahead of a vote will take at least a few more days. A special session of Congress could theoretically be convened, but it's not at all clear that it will come to that.

The world's attention will shift from the decision-making process in Washington to the UN Security Council and the G20 summit set to take place in St. Petersburg this week.

Over the past few days, discussions among the five permanent members of the UN Security Council have been completely paralyzed. While the United States, Britain and France are trying to push forward a resolution condemning Syrian President Bashar Assad for using chemical weapons on his own people and approving military action against Syria, Russia and China have been blocking any such efforts. The time bought by Obama's decision to seek congressional approval for a military strike will be used to attempt to thaw the diplomatic freeze.

As for the G20 summit, it is expected to take place in the shadow of the shaky relationship between the United States and Russia, which became more tense because of Russia's protection of Edward Snowden, the former contractor for the U.S. National Security Agency who is accused of espionage. Russia's decision to grant Snowden asylum prompted Obama to cancel his planned meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, although the two sides may now be interested in discussing the Syria issue.

Both Obama and Putin have an interest in finding a diplomatic solution. Obama is not enthusiastic about attacking Syria. He did give a passionate speech about the need to hold the Assad regime accountable for the "assault on human dignity" and uphold the international prohibition on the use of chemical weapons. But he also made a point of saying there was no rush, that an attack "will be effective tomorrow, or next week, or one month from now."

From Putin's perspective, a diplomatic solution in which he is involved will bolster Russia's international standing and, more important, keep it from being humiliated. A massive U.S. attack on Assad would show the world that U.S. military technology is superior to that which Russia has supplied Assad, as well as further weakening Putin's Damascus ally and showing the world that Russia doesn't hold much sway.

How would a diplomatic solution look? Members of Israel's Foreign Ministry and various other foreign ministries in the West have begun to examine a scenario that seems a little unrealistic but is a genuine possibility. In this scenario, the United States and Russia would work together to write a UN Security Council resolution that would call on Assad to transfer any chemical weapons in his possession to Russian forces, along with UN inspectors. The chemical weapons would be removed from the country or destroyed on Syrian soil.

At the same time, an international peace council would meet in Geneva, in keeping with a U.S.-Russia plan that had been in the making for several months. The council would focus on reaching an agreement to end the civil war in Syria and on shaping a new political arrangement that would prevent radical Islamists associated with Al-Qaida from taking over.

The chances that such a plan would meet with success are slim. Nonetheless, if the United States and Russia seize this opportunity, war could be averted. On the other hand, if such efforts fail, Obama will be able to take the military route with extensive international support.