This paper assesses the uses and misuses of history in public discussions about the future of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. After the Obama administration announced in 2011 that the United States intends to redirect its diplomatic, economic, and military resources away from the Middle East, policymakers turned to political scientists, military strategists, even game theorists to assess the so-called “pivot.” Historians, by contrast, have largely been absent from these discussions, even though many arguments both for and against the pivot turn on interpretations of the past. This paper contends that the relative dearth of rigorous and informed historical thinking within policy discussions is hampering policymakers as they pursue this new foreign policy paradigm. The paper begins with a literature review of the most frequently cited policy papers about the pivot, summarizing and critically assessing the kinds of historical analogies, assumptions, and arguments employed by the pivot’s supporters and detractors. In particular, the paper focuses on how analysts are interpreting and applying lessons from America’s Cold War competition with Russia in the Middle East to asses China’s growing regional influence. I then examine the analytic value such thinking provides policymakers with an eye toward how the region has evolved since the Cold War and critical differences between Soviet and Chinese ambitions, capabilities, and strategies. Finally, the paper assesses the limitations of historic analogy by explaining why the region’s future is more likely to turn on its own unique political, economic, social, and institutional dynamics than leading western accounts tend to acknowledge. The paper is part of a larger project I will lead during the 2023-2024 academic year at Georgetown University’s Institute for the Study of Diplomacy. Centered around a course I will teach in Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service, entitled “America in the Middle East: Studies in Applied History,” the project examines the contributions historical literacy can make to improving how the United States engages the region. This paper, which is slated to be published in the Department of State’s Lessons Learned series and incorporated into the department’s regional training curriculum, aims to engender in future U.S. diplomats an appreciation for the analytic value of historical thinking in formulating and implementing U.S. foreign policy.