Defense Secretary Robert Gates plans to step down sometime next year, leaving to his successor a long list of to-dos ranging from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to efforts to get the Pentagon's sprawling budget under control.
Gates, whose departure date has long been a subject of speculation, told Foreign Policy magazine in an interview published Monday that he would leave well before the 2012 presidential election because waiting until the end of President Obama's first term would make the job more difficult to fill.
"I think that it would be a mistake to wait until January 2012," Gates said. "This is not the kind of job you can fill in the spring of an election year," he added.
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell Monday characterized Gates' statements as "the secretary musing to a reporter about when it would make sense" to retire. Morrell said Gates, who recently proposed dramatic steps to make Pentagon spending more efficient, will "clearly [be] here well into next year."
Morrell also quipped that Gates, who initially planned to retire at the end of the Bush administration, has been a "miserable failure about retirement" because his "sense of duty and responsibility have trumped his desires."
Nonetheless, the secretary's comments provide Pentagon watchers with a window for the secretary's retirement - and add fuel to the speculation about who will succeed him.
The next Defense secretary will inherit Gates' plan to slash overhead and other unnecessary costs within the Pentagon budget by more than $100 billion over the next five years and redirect those savings to other, higher-priority items.
Gates' goal is to preserve money for force structure and modernization, but some of the details - including closing the Norfolk, Va.-based Joint Forces Command and nixing dozens of general officer posts - could be a difficult sell.
Even more difficult could be preserving real growth in the Pentagon's budget, particularly as operations overseas wind down and the administration gets serious about deficit reduction. While Gates wants to maintain at least a small measure of real growth, many analysts think doing so will be impossible.
The next secretary will likely have the difficult job of managing a decreasing defense budget, said Gordon Adams, the Office of Management and Budget's associate director of national security during the Clinton administration. At the same time, the secretary will be managing a December 2011 date to withdraw all U.S. forces from Iraq, as well as possibly winding down operations in Afghanistan.
"If not God, [Gates' successor will be] very close because it's going to be a superhuman job," said Adams, who now teaches at American University and was one of several analysts who met with Gates last week to discuss his cost-cutting plan. "There aren't that many people in Washington with that level of heft and credibility."
Adams added that Gates' successor will have to have credibility both within the Defense Department and on Capitol Hill, where Gates has won most of his budget battles.
Also important is selecting someone willing to serve in the post for the long haul. The initiatives he or she will inherit - particularly reforming the internal bureaucratic management of the Pentagon - "demand someone ... who is going to give them sustained attention and leadership," Adams said.
Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, said Gates has posed many interesting questions about the size and shape of the post-Iraq and Afghanistan military. But following through on many of those questions will be up to Gates' successor.
Considering what he or she will inherit, the next Defense secretary will have to know the issues, ranging from ongoing military operations to Pentagon management, Korb said. Other key characteristics for the next secretary, Korb said, are the ability to make tough decisions and to rise above partisan politics.
Neither Adams nor Korb believe the next secretary will be a retired high-ranking military officer. Despite Obama's penchant for bringing ex-military leaders into his administration, Adams said former generals and admirals are simply too entrenched in the military bureaucracy to bring about change.
"Civilian control here is critical," Adams said.