Do we need to privilege or at least revalorize the methods of the historian, as opposed to those of the political scientist or theorist of international relations, when thinking about and studying American foreign policy, especially American nuclear statecraft? Was the history of the Cold War, for example, really coterminous with the history of the nuclear revolution? And what might an interdisciplinary approach, blending the historian’s craft with the theoretical ambitions of security-studies scholars, look like? I’m delighted to have had Professor Francis Gavin on the podcast for the first time to discuss his book, “Nuclear Statecraft: History and Strategy in America’s Atomic Age”.