Wednesday's international meeting, known as Geneva II, is aimed at ending the Syrian conflict. Based on the Geneva Communiqué of 30 June 2012, it envisages a transitional government with full executive powers with members of both the government and opposition. Here are four points to bear in mind:

1. Success will be a process, not a deal

Expectations are low, very low. Even the most optimistic diplomat is not expecting a resolution of the conflict at Geneva. US secretary of state, John Kerry outlined the limited aims: "the Geneva peace conference is not the end but rather the beginning, the launch of a process, a process that is the best opportunity for the opposition to achieve the goals of the Syrian people and the revolution." Above all, regime and opposition cannot trust each other and will not agree on Assad's future.

If there is a positive to Geneva, it is that the US and Russia are working more together than in opposition to each other. Much depends on Messrs Kerry and Lavrov (Russia's foreign minister Sergey Viktorovich) coaxing their respective allies into abandoning their maximalist goals and at minimum, keeping them at the table.

Confidence-building measures are needed to shore up this process. These could include prisoner releases, access to deliver aid and localised ceasefires.

2. There is no legitimate representative of the Syrian people

The Geneva II circus is more about who goes than what happens when they get there. But the overwhelming majority of Syrians may not be represented at all. Most Syrians want an end to the fighting that has decimated their country, but who is pushing for that on Geneva? Too many in the regime and opposition believe only in a military option.

The regime has no electoral legitimacy and has committed crimes against humanity against its own people. It does have a support base in Syria, especially minorities who fear (and have been made to fear) the alternative. The opposition also has legitimacy issues. It was international players, not Syrians, who anointed the Syria National Coalition as the sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people. This is not the view of all Syrians; some see it as disconnected from Syrians on the ground and as a pawn of the US and regional powers such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

Increasingly, western diplomats and UN officials want a greater role for civil society, and particularly women, inside Syria. If Geneva II initiates a process, expect these constituencies to have a bigger role.

3. Those not at Geneva may matter more than those who are

The Syrian regime is sending diplomats. There are none of the military or security figures who effectively run the regime. All big decisions are made in Damascus, so the regime's delegation will have zero ability to make concessions.

Major armed opposition groups refused to attend. Some declared those going to Geneva as traitors. Their consent is vital for any ceasefires, access for aid supplies and prisoner swaps.

As Geneva starts, Aleppo is still under bombardment by the regime's air force. Additional evidence of war crimes suggesting the deliberate killing of 11,000 detainees by the Syrian regime makes dealing with the Assad regime even tougher for the opposition.

But the big empty chair will be that of Iran. On Monday it was invited and then disinvited. As the Assad regime's key regional supporter and patron of the Lebanese group Hezbollah many believe that to get a peaceful transition in Syria Iran's role is vital.

4. Ending the Saudi-Iranian cold war is vital to ending the Syrian conflict



Since the arming of the Syrian uprising, a deadly proxy war has stoked the conflict. The main parties are Saudi Arabia and Iran, with the two Middle East behemoths engaged in a regional power struggle. Its most bloody outcome is seen in Syria but it has devastated Iraq and threatens Lebanon.

Iran has provided weapons and funds to the Syrian regime. Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies have armed various Syrian opposition groups. As long as these countries fuel the conflict by backing their preferred allies, those who believe in a military solution to the Syrian crisis will be encouraged to continue the fight. There has been little sign of a climbdown from either party. A ceasefire between these two powers may be needed before there is one in Syria.