Logo CFG Header

The views and perspectives contained in these Blogs are from individual contributors and external sources, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or position of the Cordoba Peace Institute - Geneva. The links are neither intended as an endorsement of particular publications nor the only source for the updates, but to connect to information in the public domain, for those interested in background or further details.

After speaking about the Egyptian people and the nation that is "united more than ever before", as he said, behind "the military", Hegazy talks about the "maverick" rebel mass of "terrorists" who had a non peaceful sit-in and who have fired at the law-abiding and human rights protecting police forces! The way Hegazy built his argument against those "terrorists" was not convincing; but he shifted to the lexicon of George W. Bush in his War on Terror and quickly equated them with the Taliban (though Taliban never had a sit-in to fulfill its demands) and he equated that with the US support (to the Talibani Brotherhood).

Never-the-less, he did so before lashing both in one sentence as "enemies" to the Egyptian military State and its supporting society. In fact this underlined the contradiction between Hegazy's militarized ideology and that of liberal democratic capitalism of US as well as any religious or divine ideology that is deemed theocratic, fanatic and terroristic by the neo Oriental Nazi, Mustafa Hegazy.

The rather "Oriental Nazi" mentality of Hegazy went on to refute all arguments by the local and foreign correspondents on the human rights abuses and the abrupt killing that took place at the hands of the security forces covered by their military peers. His argument was always like "How come you did not see them as terrorists? You should be logical enough (and believe in my own logic) and you should believe me!".

For Hegazy, all protesters were not peaceful and they were maverick terrorists shooting all people; though in the end, the number of people killed from those protesters was massive, including the ones who had to jump from a bridge over the Nile into the water to escape the live ammunition shooting from the security. This scene must remind the Egyptians with a similar one when the Egyptian authorities under the monarchy in 1940's opened a bridge when students were demonstrating on it, and thus, many of them fell into the water (and it is not a secret that many Egyptians by then till now "cannot swim").

This neo Oriental Nazi ideology even prevented Hegazy from speaking about democracy as we know it. For him, the nation building by the military is going through (and should not be disrupted or interrupted by democracy seeking demonstrations). This came as he said that the Constitution amendments are almost finished and the Committee of the 50 will be finalized soon. Both the Committee of the 10 and that of the 50 are appointed by the military, though the 50 members of a rather Constituent Assembly are distributed as quotas by the military to various societal segments and entities. Hegazy here hints that the Constitution that the new military regime wants (not the public) will be delivered to the public (to say "Yes" in a rigged referendum) because the military and its neo Oriental Nazi intellectuals like Hegazy know what is best for the people and the nation, and thus, the people do not have to bother to be consulted or engaged in any dialogue or so, or to make any suggestions or proposals, in this Constitution. Hegazy wants to say to the Egyptians: "For the Constitution, we will do it for you. You do not have to worry".

The Hegazy sort of military patriarchy comes higher when it comes to Civil Society and associations. Under the pretext of combating terrorism, he says that all associations, groupings and civil society entities would be (scrutinized and) legalized. This means that a new Mc Arthurian lens would be put to eliminate the NGO's that would be deemed as terrorist (the Islamist ones) and those supporting terrorism (including the democracy advocating and the human rights ones). The issue here does not start or end with the Brotherhood as an entity, association or group, it could be extended under the mentality of Hegazy and his peer military fan intellectuals to include the foreign funded organizations (as we saw under the rule of SCAF) and, of course, the ones who advocate Human Rights in the way that criticizes the military and disrupts the nation-building in this "foundational not transitional" period as Hegazy labels it.