As NATO and the GCC persevere with their project of remodeling the Greater Middle East and North Africa, a constant flow of fighters have been crossing from Libya into Syria and vice versa. According to Alexander Mezyaev, far from pursuing peace as stipulated in its Charter, the United Nations has become an instrument of this policy.
- B. Lynn Pascoe (left), Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, speaks with Members of the Security Council, including (from right), Susan Rice of the United States; Gérard Araud of France; Peter Wittig of Germany; and Mark Lyall Grant of the United Kingdom; before the Council’s meeting on the situation in Libya. (29 February 2012)
For the first time the UN Security Council viewed the results of the Mission in Libya operation after it was established in September last year. The report of UN Secretary General was submitted for the Council’s consideration to convince its members that the prolongation of the Mission’s activities was necessary. That’s what was done. The UN Security Council took decision to extend the operation of the Mission for a further period of up to 12 months and specified a new mandate. As it states the Mission is to aid the Libyan authorities to define national requirements and priorities throughout the whole country; to promote the rule of law, to monitor and protect human rights, to restore public security, to fight illegal proliferation of all types of arms and related material (shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles known as man portable air defense systems are of particular concern).
No matter the UN Secretary General’s report tried to portray the Libyan authorities in the most positive light, a scrutiny of events in Libya couldn’t be avoided.
The new Ban Ki-moon’s report contains information on combat actions of the forces loyal to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, that continue resistance to NATO/UN occupants and local collaborators. The resistance takes place in the biggest cities: Tripoli, Bani-Walid, Corfu etc .
Trying to smooth the gravity of the situation the UN Secretary General calls the combat actions “skirmishes”, and it’s not the only absurdity in his report that doesn’t clarify the understanding of the situation but rather makes it more complicated. For instance, besides new Libyan authorities and “old regime supporters” all of a sudden a third actor appears – some “revolutionary brigades”. Who are they, what areas do they control, whose command are they under – the report doesn’t say a word about it. But the text makes it clear what the new actor is needed for: “the “revolutionary brigades” continue to carry out arrests of alleged former regime supporters, and interrogation, including at disclosed locations, as well as to control known detention centers”. There are “acts of severe torture and ill treatment perpetrated by the brigades including death in custody, particularly in Tripoli, Misrata, Zintan, Gheryan”.  Now everything becomes clear. The new Libyan authorities have nothing to do with it, it’s all the fault of some mythical “brigades”. Still another question crops up: if the brigades operate in Tripoli itself, what does the “government” control?
The UN special representative for Libya Ian Martin came from Libya to take part in the Security Council’s session and to shed light on what the situation is like on spot. His report was no less a sad sight. He also maintained there were some “armed brigades” but it is not clear who they were and under whose control they acted. 
Libya Permanent Representative to the UN Shalgam was more open. He told straight that there were areas where the government failed to establish control. No police presence and no courts make it impossible for the new authorities to be responsible for what was happening there. But somehow Shalgam didn’t make precise what parts of the country those areas out of “government” control were situated in. According to international law any authorities constitute a legal government if they control the territory. That’s de jure. It’s tacitly recognized de facto that a government should control at least the larger part of the country. It’s exactly what lacks in the case of the National Transitional Council. So, the representatives have to invent rather stupid reports.
The “new Libya” authorities know their heads could roll in the wink of an eye. That’s why the Libya UN representative raised alarm. He said it’s known that some former Gaddafi regime leaders were plotting a coup d’etat. “In the past few days a number of armed cells have been detained. They were plotting to sabotage and bomb Tripoli. Al-Qadhafi agents are sending funds to Libya for acts of sabotage”.  Shalgam said he had sent to the Security Council and the International Criminal Court copies of recorded phone conversation of former Libyan Prime Minister Al-Baghdadi al-Mahmoudi (now living in Tunisia) personally giving instructions to launch sabotage acts. In a week Libyan present “prime minister” Abdel Rahim al-Kib addressed the Council imploring it to cancel the arms embargo against Libya.
Let the earth burn under the feet of the “government”. To save the present regime the UN Security Council abrogated the arms supplies embargo against Libya made effective by clause 14 of the Resolution N 1973, but the clauses 9 and 10 of the resolution 1970 (with amendments inserted by the 2009 resolution) remained in force. Still the people’s resistance to newly authorities continues. But the Libya’s entreaty to return its funds captured by the “Western democracies” somehow was left without response. The resolution only “instructed” the Sanctions Committee to permanently oversee the other steps introduced by the resolutions 1970, 1973 and 2009 concerning only the Libyan Investment Authority and Libyan African Investment Portfolio. It also envisaged a plausible abrogation of the sanctions by the Committee but only when appropriate. 
There is a special operation to transfer the Syrian “opposition” brigands into Libya conducted under the cover of the UN Mission and its head I. Martin.
Once the fact has become known  I. Martin tried to make it look like it was not militants but rather “refugees” fleeing from the Bashar Assad bloody regime. But for anyone who has ever seen a map it’s clear that one can “escape” from Syria into Libya only through Jordan and Israel and then crossing Egypt. And to overcome it all to be granted asylum in the most “problem free” country! Looks like these people are not refugees but rather marathon runners. As one can see it’s another silly story. But nobody cares about the authenticity of the explanations offered.
Since a long time the UN Security Council’s sessions have become examples of cynicism and hypocrisy, a world wide stage for spreading fabrications to promote public opinion support for the most bloody and base crimes.
On March 9 in Geneva the International Commission of Inquiry on Libya presented a formal report at the UN Human Rights Council’ session. Its Chairman Kirsch (former head of the International Criminal Court) said crimes against humanity and war crimes were committed in Libya. He said it was necessary to conduct an additional investigation of NATO’s activities in the country as well of circumstances of Muammar Gaddafi and his son Mutassim’s deaths.
The Russia’s UN Human Rights Council’s representative called the report “not balanced enough”. It’s a surprisingly diplomatic interpretation. It’s a well known and documented fact that the multiple crimes were committed as a result of NATO combat operations in Libya. One can recall the August 9 2011 bombings of Zlitan, that led to the death toll of 80, including 30 children. Or the strikes against Tripoli TV center in July 2011. Inexplicably these and many other (the most significant) events of human casualties under the NATO bombs are not even mentioned in the Commission’s report. No matter the report contains a special section devoted to the death of Muammar Gaddafi and his son Mutassim, the lawyers appear to make strange conclusions. The Commission insists no matter it has made many requests, it has received no autopsy report but only pictures of the body, that don’t allow to determine the cause of death. It made possible a conclusion that “the Commission has been unable to confirm the death of Muammar Gaddafi as an unlawful killing.”.  The Commission members, prominent lawyers, pretend to be novices in legal matters that have never seen video footages of Gaddafi’s being humiliated, nor the testimony of his murderers. The critically crucial fact that a prisoner was destitute of life happened to be of no legal significance for experienced lawyers.
The UN Security Council’s deliberations on the situation in Libya in March this year and the results of investigation conducted by the UN Commission’s of inquiry on Libya testify that a plan to convert Libya into a “twilight zone” of world political scene is underway. The attempts are undertaken to make it kind of a symbiosis of Iraq and Somalia, a place of uncontrolled “sprawling” of weapons, pumping free oil and training militants for new revolutions. But till the resistance of the Libyan Jamahiriya’s forces is not broken this plan may be frustrated.