In the wake of the military victory in Iraq, the battle between the State Department and the Defense Department for control over U.S. foreign policy has intensified, U.S. officials said yesterday, with skirmishes waged almost daily over policy toward North Korea, the Middle East peace process and the reconstruction of Iraq.
 
 While relations between Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld are said to be civil, the bureaucratic tussles among mid-level officials are intense, officials said. Just days before a meeting this week in Beijing between U.S. and North Korean officials, for instance, the Defense Department pressed to have James A. Kelly, the head of the delegation and Powell's chief Asian expert, replaced by Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton, a Rumsfeld ally on North Korea. Powell rejected the suggestion.
 
 The State Department, for its part, sought to limit the role in Iraq for Iraqi exile leader Ahmed Chalabi because officials there viewed him as a fraud with little backing inside the country. The Pentagon's civilian leadership, populated with Chalabi supporters, responded by airlifting  him into Iraq with hundreds of exile troops. He is now in Baghdad, attempting to build a political base.
 
 At the heart of many of the disputes are complaints by conservatives inside and outside the administration that the State Department bureaucracy is thwarting President Bush from carrying out a forceful agenda to stop terrorism and confront enemy states -- a point that former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), a member of a Pentagon advisory committee who is close to Rumsfeld, plans to make in a speech this morning at the American Enterprise Institute.
 
  Gingrich said he plans to call for major overhaul of the State Department, including hearings on Capitol Hill and an examination of the department by a task force of retired foreign service officers.  He said he wanted to contrast the success of a transformed Defense Department with the "failure of State," which he described as "six months of diplomatic failure followed by one month of military success now to be returned to diplomatic failure to exploit the victory fully."
 
 Gingrich, in an interview, said, "The story of diplomatic defeat is a bigger and more profound story" than the U.S. military victory. Among other things, he cited the failure to win Turkey's approval to accept U.S. troops, the French campaign against the war and the inability to win a U.N. resolution  authorizing force.
 
 The diplomatic efforts before the war were a period of "unrelenting defeat," Gingrich said. "For 120 days we were losing ground worldwide."
 
 Powell has forcefully defended his prewar diplomacy, arguing that it was a significant victory to win a unanimous vote in the U.N. Security Council in November to authorize new weapons inspections in Iraq. Told of Gingrich's remarks, a senior State Department official said last night that  in August, "we had no one with us at all. The diplomatic efforts, even the failed ones, set the conditions" for achieving bases for troops, allies in the military campaign and possibly financial backing for the rebuilding of Iraq.
 
 The official suggested that Gingrich, who he said has a history of attacking the State Department, was using Powell as a foil to attack  Bush. "If he has a problem with Powell, he has a problem with George Bush because what Powell has done is what Bush wants."  Gingrich said he was not acting on Rumsfeld's behalf, and he was not trying to criticize Powell. "This is not about ideology," he said. "This is about effectiveness once we decide to do something." Victoria Clarke, the chief Pentagon spokeswoman, said she was unaware of Gingrich's speech but said what members of the advisory committee, the Defense Policy Board, "say or do does not necessarily represent defense policy or opinion."
 
 But Gingrich said he plans to bring up issues that have sharply divided the State and Defense  departments. "Increasingly the fights are beneath the principals' levels," one administration official said, referring to the president's senior foreign policy advisers, and ultimately must be resolved between Powell and Rumsfeld themselves, if not the president.
 
 Powell has insisted that his relations with Rumsfeld are fine, despite the policy differences between their two departments. "I talk to Don constantly. We see each other all the time. We get along fine," Powell said in an interview this month. "Are there disagreements and debates from time to time? Of course there are. I mean, I've never been in an administration where there wasn't. But we resolve them as two people who are serving one people and one president."
 
 State Department officials  cringe when a "Rummy- gram'' -- policy suggestions made by Rumsfeld -- arrives at Foggy Bottom, such as last week's missive suggesting Bolton as the chief Korea negotiator. Rumsfeld made other suggestions on Korea policy, an official said, but State already had thought of them, making him wonder if Rumsfeld had been well-briefed by his staff.
 
 Gingrich, who since resigning as  speaker in 1999 has tried to forge a prominent role for himself in the Republican Party on defense and national security issues, said he plans to fault the State Department for advocating a "road map" for peace in the Middle East. The plan was crafted with the European Union, Russia and the United Nations. Working with those entities, he said, is "intellectually a formula for denial of anything we've learned over the past six months."
 
 Bush, under pressure from British Prime Minister Tony Blair, endorsed the plan shortly before the war and said he would release it to the Israelis and Palestinians once a new Palestinian prime minister is confirmed, probably this week. But key officials in the Defense Department also have expressed sympathy for Israeli efforts to limit the involvement of the Europeans and the United Nations in the peace process.
 
 "The president is on record for supporting a Palestinian state in three years," the senior State Department official said. "We're the only one trying to do what he wants to do."
 
  Gingrich also said the Agency for International Development, an arm of the State Department, has bungled the reconstruction job in Afghanistan and needs to be transformed into an "agile and effective outsourcing agency." Rumsfeld and Powell have clashed over AID's role in Iraq, though ultimately Powell agreed to have AID report directly to Jay M. Garner, the retired general hired by the Pentagon to run postwar Iraq.
 
 Gingrich said the "final straw" that caused him to speak out was Powell's announcement that he planned to visit Syria. Rumsfeld and other top Pentagon officials had assailed Syria, accusing the country  of aiding Saddam Hussein's government and allowing top Iraqi officials to flee. Powell's statement helped cool the diplomatic fires. But Gingrich said Powell should not visit a country that he said was obviously  linked to terrorism.
 
 "Powell allowed himself to be convinced to go to Damascus" by the department's Near East Bureau, which Gingrich said "appeases dictators and tries to be nice to corrupt regimes." The State Department official noted that Bush said over the weekend that Syria appeared to be cooperating in response to U.S. concerns, in effect endorsing Powell's approach.
 
 At State, Powell has been widely credited for turning around morale, winning budget increases, improving managment and promoting talented career civil servants. An independent assessment of Powell's tenure by a group of former ambassadors, released last month by the Foreign Affairs Council, concluded Powell has  made huge strides in winning resources for the department, changing its culture and improving its public diplomacy and congressional relations efforts. "The accomplishments are substantial, even historic," the report concluded.
 
  Gingrich acknowledged that Powell has rebuilt morale at the State Department. But, he said, "he rebuilt the morale of people who don't believe in what George Bush believes in and try to undermine what Bush believes in."