( CNN ) -- When the Arab League asked for U.N. Security Council endorsement of its call for a new government in Syria and sought the imposition of sanctions to pressure Syrian President Bashar al-Assad , the Russians went toe-to-toe with the United States , publicly and behind closed doors . The Russians forced significant concessions in the wording and meaning of the resolution . They won the elimination of sanctions . And then they rejected the compromise they forged . Looks like , feels like , sounds like Cold War redux . But this assessment is overly simplified . So too are assertions that Russia cast its veto to protect a client state or as revenge against the West after being burned by the Libya resolutions . More precisely , the Russian tactics and veto are a rejection of the proactive , norm-enforcing Security Council that has emerged in the past decade . The Libyan case was the Russians ' final straw for their claim that the Council had moved beyond the constraints that the charter places on U.N. infringement of national sovereignty , the use of force , and imposing economic sanctions . One of Moscow 's major goals is to end the Council 's regular use of sanctions as a leveraging tool or to isolate a state . The Russians have maintained that Council sanctions resolutions should be the maximum method of coercion . But the West has considered such sanctions as a springboard for the U.S. Treasury and EU banks to enforce far reaching asset freezes and banking restrictions . This week , as foreshadowed in their October veto , the Russians signaled the end of the U.N. sanctions era . The significance of this action can not be overstated . Beginning with the sanctions against Iraq in August 1990 , the Security Council has imposed sanctions in 20 cases and placed peacekeeping missions in dangerous war zones 19 times . Such proactive council legislation has been successful in de-funding al-Qaeda , stifling murderous militias in Africa , slowing nuclear proliferation and protecting innocent civilians from slaughter . Now the Russians have taken the teeth out of the tiger that was the Security Council . Understanding China 's negative vote also requires a wider view . Beijing has only exercised its Security Council veto when Russia has vetoed . Never in council history has China been the lone `` nay . '' Reports had been circulating in council corridors hinting that the Chinese were leaning toward abstaining on the Arab League resolution . But to judge their veto as Cold War solidarity also is too simplistic . China 's view of Security Council sanctions has moved from disrespect to outright disdain . Its undermining of sanctions began as the investigative Panels of Experts -- created by the council to monitor sanctions violations in African conflicts -- discovered increasing amounts of Chinese small arms in Sudan , Somalia and Eritrea , despite U.N. arms embargoes . The Chinese have worked especially hard to hide and then to discredit the reports of the Panel of Experts created in Security Council resolution 1874 , which monitors sanctions on North Korea . Breaking with the established transparency practice -- that U.N. Panel Reports are released on the sanctions committee 's website -- the Chinese blocked release of the panel 's 2011 report , even though the document was leaked and had appeared for months on global websites . Re-enter the Russians , who reacted the same way to the first report of the Iran Sanctions Panel of Experts delivered to the council in May 2011 , by blocking its publishing . This created a perfect storm for undermining the effectiveness of the U.N. sanctions championed by the West . In the Security Council Sanctions Committees , the Chinese allied with Russian condemnation of the Iran Panel report and blocked its publication . In turn , Russia supported the Chinese critique of the North Korean panel report . On the face of it , hardball global politics in the Security Council provides a plausible explanation for the Russian-led veto of the Syria resolution . But the reasons underpinning the Moscow-Beijing veto are more far-reaching than that . Their actions seek to roll back advances the Security Council has made in employing various methods , especially economic sanctions , that have been especially successful in achieving the charter 's dual mandate to sustain peace and security and to protect human rights . This is not the Cold War politics of the Security Council revisited -- it is much more serious than that . It is kneecapping the council after two decades of reasonable success . Follow CNN Opinion on Twitter . Join the conversation on Facebook . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of George Lopez .
Russia vetoed Arab League call for sanctions on Syria ; China went along . George Lopez : The veto is effort to keep U.N. from imposing sanctions , period . Russia believes the U.N. must be limited in its response to crises , he writes . Lopez : China , Russia want to curb U.N. 's ability to promote peace , human rights .