Difficult times for the Syrian revolution, but people continue to fight

 Misleading article by Judith Orr from the first sentence. The Syrian National Council does not have the same base and beliefs as "Western politicians" (whoever they are), the SNC because they exist to negotiate were always likely to find pressure to attend Geneva, but are still adamant that they go to bury Assad, not to praise him.

 Much of the article is taking up with quotes from Joseph Daher, who is a Syrian revolutionary socialist. I disagree with many of his formulations. Moreover, I think he is used as excuse for politics that fails to show solidarity with the broader Syrian revolution by some on the British far left, from the criticism of armed groups taking a lack of need to delineate the difference between them and Assad. I think my differences with what he says are clear if not so great in the overall scheme of things, so I'll go through them. 

 "Geneva is a big threat to the revolution."
I'm not sure about this. Acceptance of the Geneva process disarming the revolution would be, but given the rejection inside Syria of Geneva, not so much.

 "The National Council has zero influence with people on the ground. "
I don't see any alternative national body, other than the Islamic Front, arising in their place, so I think there is a lot of passive acceptance of their role if there is to be any negotiating, which doesn't mean they could enforce any deal if they did sell out. Which is one reason they aren't likely to overdo it.

 “None of these forces want the revolution to deepen or be victorious.”
I don't think the latter part is true. They may not want the same revolution as you right now, and I think it is important for revolutionary socialists to deal with what is not what ought to be, but they want Assad and his régime of murder and torture to go. That is the main dividing line in Syria right now, and for now they are on the right side.

 'Joseph explained that most Western leaders would like to move Assad out.
But they want to install “a Yemeni-style solution, where all the structures of the regime kept in place”.'
I think this may well not be true. Overthrowing régimes outside their sphere of influence is difficult and expensive in a number of ways, and so better to keep Assad in power, either because it costs the Russians in power and prestige, or because they want him to fight al-Qaida[sic].

 And then I read the rest and couldn't find much to disagree with. There is an interesting omission about the slogan , “The solution is not in Geneva but in the Hague”, which shows that ,many activists want the world to treat Assad as the war criminal he is, and get rid of him or give Syrians the means to do so. This is at odds who want to see the West and the Gulf states as as much a threat to Syrians as Assad and his foreign allies, a view which is foreign to the experience of many Syrians.