Why Every President Needs a Historian in the Room

Presidents are surrounded by experts. Economists explain markets. Generals assess military options. Intelligence officers evaluate threats. Lawyers interpret statutes and constitutional powers.

Yet one type of expert is rarely found among a president’s closest advisers: a professional historian.

That absence is striking because presidents routinely confront questions that have historical dimensions. Decisions about war, diplomacy, trade, immigration, economic policy, and constitutional authority often involve issues that previous generations have faced in different forms. History does not provide simple answers, but it can illuminate patterns, identify precedents, and reveal unintended consequences that policymakers might otherwise overlook.

Recent discussions about U.S. policy toward Iran illustrate why historical perspective can be valuable. Reasonable people may disagree about the merits of any particular agreement, negotiation, or military action. Historians cannot determine what policy a president should adopt. What they can do is broaden the discussion by asking questions rooted in historical experience.

A historian examining any major diplomatic agreement might begin by considering earlier efforts to secure peace and stability through negotiation. One frequently cited example is the Treaty of Versailles, signed in 1919 at the conclusion of the First World War. Historians continue to debate the treaty’s long-term consequences, but most agree…