The Achilles Trap: Saddam Hussein, the C.I.A., and the Origins of America's Invasion of Iraq

There have been numerous books written about the events that led to America’s invasion of Iraq in 2003, most from the American perspective. In The Achilles Trap, journalist Steve Coll has created a sweeping overview that includes the Iraqi side of the story as well. Like Nixon, Saddam Hussein taped many of his interactions with his officials. Coll uses this treasure trove, as well as interviews with key figures in both countries, to create a definitive account of the decades of events leading to the war’s outbreak.

When Saddam took power in 1979, despite the brutality of his regime, America viewed him as an ally against Iran. After Iraq went to war with Iran, the CIA fed Saddam critical information to insure that his forces would show more not be defeated on the field of battle. This was done despite Iraq’s illegal use of chemical weapons. Even with this support, Saddam feared that the CIA was actively working to remove him from office. This led him in the 1980s to order his scientists to begin work on creating an atomic weapon. Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 fractured the America-Iraq relationship and led to the US entering the fray. Soundly beaten, but allowed to stay in power, Saddam ordered the destruction of any evidence that he had attempted to create weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

After 1990, all official contact between the US and Iraq were cut off, which led to the CIA having no idea what was taking place in Iraq. Because of this rupture, American officials continued to believe Saddam was still working to develop WMDs. In the years following, Coll shows how the lack of communication between the two countries led each to grow increasingly distrustful of the other. Having destroyed his WMD program, Saddam was convinced that the CIA had to know they had no such weapons. But since he continued to try to obstruct the UN inspectors' search for them in his country, the US still felt the threat was real. Despite the UN inspectors finally concluding there was no such weapon program, following 9/11, ignoring these findings, President George W. Bush made the decision to send troops into Iraq to overthrow Saddam.

This book presents a fascinating picture of how miscalculations on both sides led to a war that would devastate Iraq and result in a deadly civil war there. It is a gripping story and a well told one. This deep dive into the circumstances leading to the conflict is an essential read, and timely. Today, just as then, the lack of formal communications between countries could well be the spark that ignites another needless conflict. show less

“The Achilles Trap,” by Steve Coll, is a fascinating, racy account of the events leading to Saddam Hussein’s arrest and the war on Iraq. I have not read other books on the events leading to the misplaced war against Iraq; however, Steve Coll’s book exposes how leaders on both sides made critical judgment errors.
The book starts with a brief exposition of Saddam’s background, which is critical in helping understand his nature. I discovered Saddam Hussein was an assassin who rose to power in Iraq. His childhood influenced his psychology. While he brooked no dissent and tortured dissenters, Saddam was not entirely irrational. As with many authoritarian leaders, the problem is that he did not care for dissent, leading him to make show more critical errors, like the attack on Kuwait.
Steve Coll’s book also exposes the Americans who did not care about Kuwaiti citizens but only for their geopolitical position in the Middle East. The book does not explicitly state Israel’s critical role in helping American strategy, but it lets the reader make the obvious inference.
The book contains fascinating quotes; for instance, Condoleezza Rice expressed an evident lack of concern for the plight of the Iraqis suffering because of American sanctions. He quotes George Bush Jr, who recalled thinking: If a dictator who tortures and gasses his people is not immoral, who is? However, Steve Coll did not take the next step by questioning the immorality of a President who lies to his people and sends his army to an immoral war.
Americans and the British could have avoided the war; this much is evident. Leaders in both countries did not care to investigate the case: they based their case on war on presumptions and lingering hatred. These incidents must make any sensible person question the perspicacity of men and women who hold the reins of power.
The book is well-paced but lacks deep analysis, which is a critical flaw, considering the material at his command. Why, for instance, did no one investigate and indict the American and British leaders, especially when the date proved their duplicity? I believe he should have asked this critical question.
However, he allows discerning readers to make their judgments. show less