Military Strike Not Imminent, Officials Say
Need for Allies And Intelligence Slows Response

By Alan Sipress and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, September 27, 2001; Page A01

Bush administration officials said yesterday that a military strike against Osama bin Laden and his supporters in Afghanistan is not imminent, citing the need to gain better intelligence about their whereabouts.

"I think it can't be stressed enough that everybody who is waiting for military action . . . needs to rethink this thing," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz told reporters after briefing NATO in Brussels.

These comments and similar remarks by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld at a briefing on Capitol Hill on Tuesday are the clearest indication yet that the administration will be taking a more deliberate approach in launching a military campaign against bin Laden and the ruling Taliban militia in Afghanistan that protects him.

"They're headed in a direction that will require time and a coalition," said Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, after receiving the classified briefing from Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin L. Powell.

This go-slow approach comes after officials had said during the past week that they would delay other stages of President Bush's war on terrorism -- including possible attacks against state sponsors of terrorism such as Iraq -- in order to move aggressively against bin Laden. The administration charges that bin Laden was behind the Sept. 11 attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Though dozens of U.S. warplanes have arrived in the Middle East and Central Asia, Wolfowitz appealed to NATO ministers for help with intelligence about bin Laden and his followers.

"In this campaign, it's worth emphasizing one of the most important things is to acquire more information about an enemy, one of whose principal means of operation is to hide and conceal," Wolfowitz said. "That is one of the reasons why it is not so easy to lay out a specific campaign plan and lots of specific actions and why many of the most important things that we are asking for are being done in the intelligence channels."

U.S. officials also said the administration has adopted a methodical approach because it wants to avoid an action that badly misfires, such as the botched attempt to rescue American hostages held by Iran in 1980.

A senior Defense official emphasized while traveling to Brussels that the military won't play the most important part of the campaign against terrorism. "It isn't exclusively military," he said of that campaign. "It isn't even primarily military."

Even when military action is taken, he added, "one of the major objectives of that action will be to get more information" -- that is, to gather additional intelligence.

Meantime, the administration continued to work on assembling a coalition of countries to share intelligence and support an eventual military thrust. The results yesterday were mixed.

During a hastily arranged visit to Washington, Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher of Egypt, a key U.S. ally, said his country could back an American effort to punish those behind the attacks on New York and Washington. But he said Egypt still wants proof of bin Laden's role.

In meetings with Bush and Powell, Maher sought to dispel concerns raised by earlier Egyptian statements that Cairo might object to a military campaign against bin Laden before a global conference on terrorism had been convened. But Maher said Egypt was still waiting for hard evidence from the Bush administration of bin Laden's involvement in the terrorist attacks.

"We believe in any move to punish those who are responsible, any move will be based on a solid case," Maher said in an interview. "I believe it is the intention of the United States government at the right moment to share whatever information they have with its close friends."

Egyptian officials said they continue to share intelligence with the United States about Islamic militants, who were locked in brutal battle with Egypt's security forces for much of the 1990s.

U.S. efforts to win cooperation from Iran and gain access to its rich intelligence about bin Laden and his Taliban protectors suffered a public setback yesterday. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme religious and political leader, rejected participation in an U.S.-led coalition against terrorism, calling the United States insincere.

Wolfowitz's trip to Brussels was aimed at cultivating cooperation with traditional U.S. allies in NATO, and he told them they were in for "a very broad campaign over a very long period of time."

Though Wolfowitz's comments could be little more than strategic deception meant to cloak an imminent strike, a senior military officer said all indications from Cabinet members are that the administration is girding for an extended fight.

Besides concerns about rushing into action against an uncertain target, there could be other reasons for the signals from the administration, including purely military ones. A veteran military planner said any Special Forces raid against terrorist sites in Afghanistan would require a variety of support personnel.

The measured approach could also reflect the need to consider possible retaliation within the United States. The Federal Aviation Administration, for example, probably will need to be brought into deliberations so it can have a plan to bolster security the day after any major military action, officials said.

U.S. officials also sounded a cautious note yesterday about plans to bolster opposition forces battling the Taliban because of the extreme sensitivities of Pakistan, a crucial U.S. ally in any campaign inside Afghanistan.

Attention has focused on the opposition Northern Alliance, the only movement controlling substantial Afghan territory beyond the Taliban's reach and actively battling the Kabul government. But Pakistan considers the Northern Alliance to be hostile largely because it receives support from Russia, Iran and most notably India, long Pakistan's fiercest adversary.

U.S. officials acknowledged the seriousness of Islamabad's concerns a day after Pakistani Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar and a former corps commander, Lt. Gen. Salahuddin Tirmizi, warned the United States against imposing a new government in Kabul. Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency played a crucial role in creating the Taliban and has long sponsored the movement as a way of ensuring a friendly government in Afghanistan.

A State Department official and other U.S. officials said the administration hopes to foster an Afghan opposition front far broader than the Northern Alliance that would also include dissident commanders within the Taliban movement.

"It's a new world for us and the Pakistanis, the Indians and the Afghans. It will require some new thinking, which is still developing," the official said.

As the administration weighed covert assistance and operations, CIA Director George J. Tenet came under fire yesterday from Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.), vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Shelby urged that someone of greater "stature" be given the job. Shelby told NBC's "Today" show that the "job is getting away" from Tenet.

Bush backed up Tenet during a speech to CIA employees. "I've got a lot of confidence in him, and I've got a lot of confidence in the CIA," he said.

Meantime, Jesse Jackson said he was weighing an invitation from Taliban representatives to visit Pakistan and discuss U.S. demands that the Afghan regime turn over bin Laden and his followers.