WASHINGTON — Senator Clinton isn’t backing off her demand for the Pentagon to produce troop withdrawal plans for Iraq, despite receiving an olive branch from Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Mr. Gates sent Mrs. Clinton a letter Wednesday in which he expressed “regret” over the war of words between her and one of his deputies, Undersecretary Eric Edelman, who suggested last week that the senator was reinforcing “enemy propaganda” by stirring talk of an American pullout from Iraq. Mrs. Clinton in May had requested that the Pentagon detail its contingency plans for withdrawing troops in the event that Congress forced an end to the war.

The defense secretary assured Mrs. Clinton, who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, that “such planning is indeed taking place,” but he stood by the Pentagon’s refusal to disclose those plans publicly, citing longstanding policy” spanning decades and multiple administrations.” He said he would be willing to work with her to establish a process by which the Pentagon could keep Congress apprised of its “conceptual thinking” with regard to “drawdown planning.”

In the letter, Mr. Gates toed a careful line between further inciting Mrs. Clinton and outright apologizing for what was widely viewed as a scathing rebuke of the former first lady by Mr. Edelman. “I truly regret that this important discussion went astray and I also regret any misunderstanding of intention,” Mr. Gates wrote, but only after he expressed his “continued strong support” for Mr. Edelman, a former aide to Vice President Cheney who now serves as the undersecretary of defense for policy.

After receiving Mr. Edelman’s letter, Mrs. Clinton had written Mr. Gates directly, calling the suggestion that she was emboldening the enemy “outrageous and dangerous.” She also introduced legislation, along with Senator Kerry of Massachusetts, to force the Pentagon to brief Congress on contingency plans for a troop withdrawal.

In his response, Mr. Gates sought to clarify Mr. Edelman’s statements without retracting them. “I emphatically assure you that we do not claim, suggest, or otherwise believe that congressional oversight emboldens our enemies, nor do we question anyone’s motives in this regard,” the secretary wrote. “That said, we all recognize that there are multiple audiences for what we say, and need to be careful not to undermine the morale of our troops or encourage our enemies.”

Yesterday, Mrs. Clinton signaled that Mr. Gates’s entreaty was an improvement but not nearly enough.

“While Senator Clinton is disappointed that Secretary Gates does not repudiate Under Secretary Edelman’s unacceptable political attack, Senator Clinton nevertheless welcomes Secretary Gates’s acknowledgment that congressional oversight of the war in Iraq is essential to our national debate,” Mrs. Clinton’s Senate spokesman, Philippe Reines, said in a statement. “She continues to believe strongly that there is absolutely no room for impugning the patriotism of those who rightfully engage in congressional oversight.” Mr. Reines said Mrs. Clinton would continue to push her legislation to force the Pentagon’s hand, in an effort “ensure that Secretary Gates’s sentiments are fulfilled.”

The dispute also remains very much alive as a campaign issue. For months Mrs. Clinton has looked for ways to demonstrate her anti-war bona fides with the left-leaning Democratic base, and she touted her fight with the Pentagon over withdrawal plans in the most recent presidential debate Monday night.

While her campaign says she is personally committed to the issue, her advisers also see it as one that will resonate with Democratic voters, showing her “leading the charge,” as one aide put it, to force the Bush administration to plan for an end to the war. And at a time when her battle with Senator Obama over foreign policy is intensifying, a public clash with the administration could undermine his effort yesterday to paint Mrs. Clinton as “Bush-Cheney lite.”