Could Herman Cain become President Rick Perry’s Secretary of Defense? It sounds like it could be a headline from a satire rag, but, according to a new statement by the Texas governor and Republican presidential hopeful, Secretary Cain could indeed be a serious possibility.

During his since-aborted campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, Cain distinguished himself as a prominent voice on foreign policy in the race — but not so much for cogent ideas. Rather, he made himself famous for a long string of foreign policy gaffes and bizarre answers to questions. Before Cain dropped out of the presidential race, he’d already declared his willingness to serve as someone else’s Defense Secretary — a willingness he restated since suspending his run.

Now, it seems like Rick Perry might be ready to take Cain up on his offer. Responding to a question about whether he’d take on Cain in a cabinet position, Perry replied:

He has all the characteristics of the type of person I would bring forward.

Here’s a compilation video of highlights of Cain discussing his pizza-making approach to foreign policy and some of his other gaffes:

Perry’s had his own problems with foreign policy. Journalists pointed out that Perry distorted a key quote from a Texas historian in an oped on the Mideast in the Wall Street Journal and Jerusalem Post. Neoconservative Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin attacked Perry for having such an obviously ghost-written piece — with a “pretense of sophistication” — “because his own foreign policy views are rudimentary.” Among Perry’s top reported foreign policy advisers are top Bush administration officials Donald Rumsfeld and Douglas Feith, and he’s met to consult with deposed Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf. (HT Jonathan Martin)

The winner of the next presidential election will face a struggling world economy and a Middle East in the process of dramatic political transition, but GOP presidential hopefuls Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain appear intent on scaring the public about fanciful dangers of an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack.

The threat of a rogue state or terrorist launching an EMP attack — the detonation of a nuclear warhead at a high altitude, shutting down electrical power across large portions of the U.S. — has become the nightmare scenario cited by defense hawks as justification for costly missile defense systems. But the likelihood of terrorists acquiring a nuclear weapon, which they would then affix to a ballistic missile, remains remarkably small.

EMP alarmism generally remains on the fringe circles of the Republican party — the Center for Security Policy‘s Frank Gaffney issued a dire warning that an EMP attack could kill “nine out of ten Americans” — but comments from Gingrich and Cain have brought the “pulsers” agenda into the Republican primary race.

Cain’s “Foreign Policy & National Security Pillars” [PDF] includes:

COUNTER URGENT THREATS
• Stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons
• Fix border security – for real
• Shield us against Cyber and
• Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) attacks

And Gingrich, listing the greatest threats to the U.S. at the Nov. 22, CNN National Security Debate, said:

The greatest threat to the United States was the weapon of mass in an American city, probably from a terrorist… [is] one of the three great threats. The second is an electromagnetic pulse attack which would literally destroy the country’s capacity to function.

Gingrich and Cain’s outspoken concern about the threat of a terrorist or rogue state’s EMP attack might appear to be simple paranoia, but the EMP campaign has been a go-to argument for proponents of costly missile defense shields and preventive war against North Korea and Iran.

While EMP rhetoric might be largely overlooked or ridiculed, EMP enthusiasts do little to hide the ulterior motives of pushing for dramatic increases in defense spending and leading the U.S. into preemptive wars with suspected nuclear proliferators.

Embattled Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, after a series of embarrassing gaffes on foreign policy, insisted that “leaders” don’t need to actually know about world affairs, but merely provide “clarity” and have a competent staff. If that’s indeed the case, Cain (if he stays in the presidential race) ought to consider firing whoever put together his foreign policy website — a case where advisers and staff, if not the candidate himself, showed glaring incompetence.

Cain’s campaign website on “foreign policy and national security” leaves a little something to be desired in terms of basic geography: It lists Germany, Russia, and the United Kingdom as countries in “the Americas.” Take a look at a screen shot of the campaign website, with those countries highlighted:

While the downloadable version of the document does indeed have a subject heading for “Europe,” where part of Russia and the whole of Germany and the U.K. are located, the website version leaves it out. Cain’s team, it seems, has a problem with editorial oversight on even the most basic subjects.

Other areas of Cain’s plan defy his simplistic foreign policy credo of “peace through strength and clarity” — namely, that he admits having no clarity at all on Libya. The intervention in Libya and its nascent transition to democracy have bedeviled the former pizza company C.E.O. Asked about it earlier this month, Cain gave a bizarre and rambling five-minute answer heavy on long, dramatic pauses. Months before that, though, he did have some clarity on the matter: opposing whatever President Obama was doing. Cain’s answer, which he blamed on a lack of sleep (promising to take a nap upon taking the White House), dovetails nicely with the declaration on his website that he “needs clarity” on Libya. That should come as no surprise from a man who thinks the Afghan Taliban insurgent group took over the North African country. (HT: UN Dispatch)