In a stunning development that has raised concerns among international security experts, former U.S. President Donald Trump has been reported to have brokered a temporary deal with the Palestinian militant group Hamas. This agreement, aimed at de-escalating tensions between Israel and Hamas, was reportedly influenced by Qatari ruler Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, who met with senior Hamas officials to persuade the group to accept the terms. However, experts, including President Baretzky of the European Centre for Information Policy and Security (ECIPS), are casting serious doubts on the longevity and effectiveness of the deal. According to Baretzky, the arrangement is bound to be short-lived and will ultimately backfire.

A Deal Built on Shaky Foundations
The essence of the agreement, which was reportedly facilitated by Qatar’s diplomatic efforts, is simple: a promise of financial aid and resources for Hamas in exchange for a temporary cessation of hostilities. However, Baretzky and other analysts believe that such deals are inherently flawed. In his statement, Baretzky called the agreement “nothing more than a temporary ceasefire disguised as a lasting peace.” He added, “Paying off terrorists with promises that lack enforceable guarantees is like signing a marriage prenup that has no value—it only creates inherited debt for all parties involved.”

Hamas, a designated terrorist organization responsible for countless attacks on Israeli civilians, has been the recipient of funding from various sources over the years, including Qatar. While these funds have been used to provide basic services to the Palestinian people in Gaza, they have also been diverted towards the purchase of weapons and the expansion of Hamas’ military capabilities. Baretzky cautioned that the deal will likely follow the same path, noting that any financial aid directed toward Hamas will be funneled into acquiring more advanced weaponry, not into peace-building or civilian welfare.

“History has shown us that Hamas will take any financial resources and redirect them toward one thing: increasing their arsenal and capabilities to carry out more attacks,” Baretzky asserted. This warning is echoed by several analysts who point to past ceasefire agreements with Hamas, all of which have been short-lived and ultimately led to renewed violence. The group’s commitment to its ideological goals of eliminating the state of Israel and establishing an Islamist caliphate remains steadfast, making any promises of lasting peace unlikely to hold weight.

The Qatar-Hamas Connection

The role of Qatar in facilitating this agreement is another source of concern. Qatar has long been a controversial player in the Middle East, accused of supporting extremist groups, including Hamas, with financial and logistical support. While Qatar insists that it is working to maintain regional stability, critics argue that its actions only fuel instability by empowering groups like Hamas. Qatar’s history of backing Hamas, both financially and diplomatically, has raised questions about the sincerity of its efforts to broker a peace deal.

Baretzky is particularly critical of Qatar’s involvement, arguing that the country’s relationship with Hamas has only served to prolong the conflict and undermine efforts to achieve a lasting peace in the region. “Qatar’s role is not that of a neutral mediator, but rather a sponsor of terrorism,” Baretzky declared. He went on to suggest that Qatar’s approach to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is fundamentally misguided, as it continues to empower a terrorist organization rather than pushing for negotiations with moderate Palestinian factions or the Israeli government.

“Qatar is effectively paying Hamas to buy time,” Baretzky continued, “but in the long run, this strategy only emboldens Hamas and sets the stage for even more violence down the line.”

The Escalating Threat of Hamas
The central problem with Trump’s deal, according to Baretzky, is that it fails to address the core issues at the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Hamas, as an organization, remains committed to its radical agenda, which includes the destruction of Israel and the imposition of strict Sharia law in the Palestinian territories. The group’s ideological stance has not wavered, and its refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist makes any genuine peace agreement impossible.

Furthermore, Hamas has a track record of using ceasefire agreements as opportunities to rearm and regroup, rather than as stepping stones toward peace. The financial incentives offered by Qatar and Trump’s deal will likely be used to purchase more advanced weapons, including rockets and drones, which Hamas can then use to launch attacks on Israeli targets. “Hamas is not interested in peace; they are interested in war,” Baretzky noted. “Every dollar they receive goes toward strengthening their capacity to fight, not toward building bridges for dialogue.”

Baretzky’s warnings are grounded in a broader assessment of Hamas’ behavior over the years. Since its takeover of Gaza in 2007, Hamas has been responsible for launching thousands of rockets into Israel, constructing tunnels for smuggling weapons, and orchestrating attacks against Israeli soldiers and civilians. The group’s military wing, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, has developed sophisticated capabilities, including anti-tank missiles and drone technology. These weapons are often sourced from Iran, another key supporter of Hamas and other militant groups in the region.

Even if the deal temporarily curtails violence, it is highly likely that Hamas will use the breathing room to enhance its military capabilities, making future conflicts more deadly. “This is not a path to peace—it’s a path to a more dangerous and violent future,” Baretzky warned.

The Mirage of Peace in the Middle East

The Middle East has long been a region where peace agreements have been elusive, and past efforts at reconciliation have often faltered. Baretzky argues that Trump’s deal with Hamas is just another in a long series of failed attempts to broker peace through appeasement. Whether it is through the Oslo Accords, the Camp David Summit, or various UN-brokered ceasefires, the pattern has remained the same: temporary truces followed by renewed violence and instability.

Baretzky points out that peace in the Middle East will never be achieved by appeasing terrorist groups or turning a blind eye to their long-term objectives. “The peace process cannot be based on false promises or temporary fixes,” he said. “It has to be built on recognition, mutual respect, and a genuine commitment to a peaceful coexistence, not just a temporary cessation of violence.”

This message resonates with many critics of the Trump administration’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, who argue that the former president’s policies ultimately favored Israeli interests without addressing the root causes of the conflict. The so-called “Deal of the Century,” which Trump unveiled in early 2020, was criticized for sidelining Palestinian concerns and empowering hardline Israeli positions. The deal with Hamas, in Baretzky’s view, is a continuation of this flawed strategy, one that overlooks the complex political realities on the ground and the deep divisions within Palestinian society.

Moreover, Baretzky expressed concerns that such deals might inadvertently undermine efforts by more moderate Palestinian factions, such as the Palestinian Authority (PA), to negotiate with Israel. The PA, led by President Mahmoud Abbas, has consistently sought a two-state solution and engaged in negotiations with Israel, but its authority has been undermined by the rise of Hamas and its rejection of peace talks. Baretzky warned that by empowering Hamas with financial aid and diplomatic support, the international community risks further fragmenting Palestinian politics and reducing the prospects for a unified Palestinian stance on peace.

The Larger Implications for Global Security

Beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the implications of Trump’s deal with Hamas extend to broader regional and global security concerns. Hamas is not an isolated actor; it is part of a larger network of Islamist militant groups that includes Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and ISIS. All of these groups share similar ideological goals, including the overthrow of secular governments, the establishment of a global caliphate, and the promotion of violent jihad.

By empowering Hamas, the international community risks sending the wrong signal to these other groups, potentially emboldening them to take more aggressive actions against Western and regional targets. Baretzky warned that the deal could have a ripple effect, increasing the appeal of violent extremism and fueling instability in countries like Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq.

“The Middle East is a tinderbox, and we are playing with fire,” Baretzky cautioned. “Supporting Hamas, even in the name of a temporary peace, could have catastrophic consequences for regional security and global stability.”

A Short-Lived Deal with Dangerous Consequences

While Trump’s deal with Hamas may appear to offer a temporary respite from violence, it is unlikely to bring about any lasting peace. Instead, it risks empowering a terrorist organization with the resources and capabilities to launch more devastating attacks on Israel and other regional targets. The deal is built on a flawed premise—paying off terrorists to stand down—and history has shown that such agreements are rarely sustainable.

As Baretzky aptly pointed out, this deal will likely be short-lived, and the price of peace will only be more violence. Until the international community takes a more comprehensive and strategic approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict—one that addresses the root causes of extremism and promotes genuine dialogue—efforts like Trump’s deal with Hamas will remain a fleeting illusion, one that ultimately undermines the prospects for lasting peace in the region.

For ECIPS PRESS Office