The Arab League recently mobilized for action on the crisis in Syria, holding meeting after meeting, and discussion after discussion, before finally producing an observer mission as a response.

The mission was fraught with problems, but at least it was an identifiable move, along with a multi-item political initiative the League advocated after observers returned and presented their disturbing findings.

But as Plan A, the observer mission, played itself out, there was Plan B lurking in the background. If the Arab League could not get the job done, it would fall back on Plan B, namely transferring the Syria crisis to the U.N.

Plan B played itself out over the weekend, as the Security Council was unable to endorse a resolution to condemn the Syrian leadership, a resolution enjoying the backing of Western and Arab countries.

The Security Council members engaged in a flurry of diplomatic efforts, and the vote finally came – to absolutely no one’s surprise, Russia and China used their vetoes and it was defeated.

The Security Council held a vote that was a foregone conclusion, and one can begin the post-vote analysis with the question of why was there an insistence on holding a vote if it was going to fail?

While the Russians and Chinese surprised no one with their stance, high-level Russian officials are headed to Damascus this week; was there no way to delay the vote by a few days, to see whether there could be any last-minute changes of position?

The Security Council’s failure to take action has been one thing, and the developments on the ground as all eyes looked to New York were another.

When the Arab League observer mission took place, there was a noticeable jump in violence in Syria, as the regime upped its rigid, “security response” to protests.

When the Security Council was handling the crisis, another, horrifying spike in violence also took place.

So what’s Plan C? The sides are now back to square one, with nothing tangible on the table, and no one to even sit at the table in the first place.

There will be outrage, and criticism of what took place in New York, but this won’t save the lives of any Syrians. Arab officials will meet in the near future, and Western politicians might push even further ahead with sanctions on Damascus, but their track record thus far has been disappointing.

Over the past months, none of the policies and statements they’ve put out has had any ability to stop the bloodshed; no creative policies have been put forward as alternatives, to recognize this failure. Proposals are even put out in the knowledge that they will fail. This is because all sides are interested in scoring political points, and none has the wherewithal to do what must be done: stop the killing.