(5 of 9)
Powell, sources say, is in his element. His State Department aides describe a man who looks after the basics, allotting specific tasks to his team. "Colin's at the center of gravity," says a senior European diplomat who has seen him up close. But that doesn't mean that Powell has always got his way without argument. The national security team met with Bush at Camp David for seven hours on the weekend after the attacks — with maps and charts spread out over tables and easels, and a mood that Card described as "like a war council" — and then continued their discussions in Washington. At the heart of the debates were two linked questions: Who was responsible for the atrocities on Sept. 11? And what immediate actions can and should be taken against those so identified? The Administration insists the attacks were the work of bin Laden's network. "The evidence we have gathered," said Bush before Congress, "all points to a collection of loosely affiliated terrorist organizations known as al-Qaeda." But when dealing with a cellular organization, proving hard evidentiary links between different operatives is like trying to build a garden wall out of wet tissue. Bin Laden has denied any involvement, and the Taliban says the restrictions it has placed on his movements and communications make it impossible for him to have masterminded the attacks. Hamid Mir, a Pakistani journalist who claims to be bin Laden's biographer, says that on Sept. 11 he was handed a written message, purportedly from bin Laden: "I am not involved in these attacks, but I support them," he said.
The Administration pours cold water on any other theory. Relying on intelligence intercepts of bin Laden's known associates discussing the hijackings, and on links between some of the suicide squad and elements of al-Qaeda, it continues to finger bin Laden. British intelligence too is convinced that al-Qaeda is responsible: "The evidence is pretty good, better than circumstantial," says a British source. For Powell, all of this has meant that policy on retaliation should proceed in a step-by-step approach, focusing first on bin Laden and the Taliban.
Right from the start, however, some in the Administration argued for a wider response. And even if it doesn't come immediately, Bush's careful but ambitious rhetoric on terror suggests it will one day arrive. There have been intelligence reports that Iraq helped train the hijackers and that one of them met with an Iraqi agent in Europe. Israeli intelligence sources, however, tell TIME they have nothing tying Saddam's regime to the attack. But the mere possibility that Saddam might have been involved got Wolfowitz's juices flowing. The leading advocate within the Administration for a policy of "regime change" in Baghdad, Wolfowitz has been convinced of Iraq's menace since long before the Gulf War. In 1979, as an analyst in the Pentagon, he authored a secret report warning of Saddam's dangerous ambitions. Now, supported by his boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and by Cheney's chief of staff Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Wolfowitz argued for a far-reaching military response beyond anything Powell had envisioned. Targets would include not only Saddam's regime but also other states that have supported terrorism in the past, like Syria and Iran.