Shafaq News/ An op-ed in the New York Times by investigative journalist Douglas Frantz suggests that the 2003 US invasion of Iraq could have been averted through a deeper understanding of Saddam Hussein's motives and direct communication with the former Iraqi president.

Frantz, author of a book based on his investigation into Hussein's perspective on the conflict, argues that Hussein's deception regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) stemmed from his ingrained distrust of the US, rather than an actual WMD program.

Frantz cites recordings of Hussein's private conversations, obtained through legal action against the Pentagon, as evidence for his claims. In these recordings, Hussein reportedly expresses his belief that the CIA was aware of his lack of WMDs and that the accusations were merely a pretext for invasion.

He is also quoted as saying, "One of the mistakes some people make is that when the enemy has decided to hurt you, you believe there is a chance to decrease the harm by acting in a certain way. In fact, he said, 'The harm won't be less.'"

The op-ed criticizes the US for failing to engage in direct communication with Hussein, arguing that such dialogue could have revealed his true intentions and potentially prevented the war. While acknowledging the challenges posed by domestic political pressures in the US, Frantz maintains that the potential benefits outweigh the risks.

The expert urged the US government to learn from its mistakes in Iraq and employ a combination of clear deterrence messages and a nuanced understanding of adversaries' motives to avoid similar situations in the future.

Frantz's argument hinges on the notion that a deeper understanding of Hussein's thought process, informed by direct communication, could have prevented the US from misinterpreting his actions and launching the invasion.