General Franks insists that all is going to plan

Tommy Franks, the US general commanding the invasion of Iraq, attempted yesterday to rebut widespread reports of a "pause" in the advance on Baghdad and of sharp divisions between himself and the US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, over strategy for the war.

General Franks appeared in public for the first time in six days to say that the operational war plan had been his and his alone. Giving his most robust performance since the war began, General Franks rejected criticism – some from former senior colleagues – that the war strategy was stalling. "We are in fact on plan,'' he said. Where we are is not only acceptable in my view – it's truly remarkable."

Without giving any hint of when a ground advance on Baghdad might begin in the wake of intensive bombardment of the Republic Guard divisions to the south of the capital, General Franks insisted that it was "simply not the case" that there was an "operational pause". He added: "There is a continuity of operations in this plan. That continuity has been seen. It will be seen in the days ahead and it will be manifested on the battlefield in Iraq at points and times of our choosing.

"What I mean by that is sometimes air, sometimes ground and sometimes special forces, sometimes combination of two of the above, sometimes all three. That's the way we're going to fight this." His remarks appeared to be part of an effort co-ordinated by Washington to rebut reports about divisions between military and political establishments over the course of the war.

Administration officials said President George Bush had convened a weekend teleconference at Camp David with his War Council at which he backed plans which administration officials insisted were endorsed by Mr Rumsfeld and the top commanders. General Franks echoed the weekend chorus of assertions that the invasion was "on plan".

Field commanders have talked this week of a pause in the Allied campaign to rest, regroup and reinforce, while securing supply lines by pacifying southern Iraq, scene of fierce paramilitary attacks on Allied forces. What was less clear was how far the strong rebuttals of these suggestions extended to a bankable denial that a ground advance towards Baghdad might have to await further bombardment of the Republican Guard's well dug-in positions, let alone reinforcements by further troops known to be on the way from the US.

General Franks denied that he had wanted to delay the start of the war to wait for more ground troops after Turkey refused to provide bases for the 4th Infantry Division to enter Iraq, only to be overruled by Mr Rumsfeld. He said "very few people" knew the truth of how the plan was put together.

"No one has driven the timing of this operation except the operational commander. Those who seek to find a wedge between the various people among us, the various leaders party to this, will likely not be able to do so because this has been worked, studied and iterated over a long time. Its chief characteristic is flexibility and adaptability." Instead, he suggested for the first time, the timing of the ground invasion had been dictated by Iraqi efforts to set fire to the Rumaila oil fields.

"We saw evidence that the regime was intending to destroy the southern oilfields," he said. "It had not been able to fully set the conditions to do so and we had an opportunity to get those oilfields.

Since we had a plan that enabled us to do either air operations first, or ground operations first or special operations first, we simply put the mosaic together in the way you have seen. That decision was made by me, not influenced by anybody else."

Asked if the war might stretch into the summer, General Franks said: "We don't know. But what we do know is this coalition sees this regime gone at the end of that."