WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Irannuclear deal will be a critical cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. For thelast few decades, debates about the future direction and orientation ofU.S. foreign policy have dominated the political scene. This latestdecision will probably increase the intensity of these debates in terms ofseveral different issues. First of all, the U.S. has isolated itself andsignificantly diverged from its allies with this step. Neither FrenchPresident Emmanuel Macron nor German Chancellor Angela Merkel couldpersuade Trump on the nuclear deal. Of course, this is not the first timethe U.S. acted unilaterally on a foreign policy issue. Previously in Iraq,the U.S. decided to invade despite direct opposition from some of itsallies in Europe; however, this time the U.S. withdrew from an agreementthat was reached a few years ago after several rounds of negotiations withits allies in Europe. This will be a serious breach of trust in thetransatlantic alliance.Second, in a broader setting there will be questions regarding Washington’scommitment to international initiatives. The damage that the Kyoto Protocolgenerated years ago reached to its zenith with the withdrawal of the U.S.from the Paris Climate Agreement and Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)initiative.Furthermore the decision was made despite reports by the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency (IAEA) demonstrating no violations of the nuclear deal.This will also generate serious tension between international institutionsand the U.S. The fact that none of the other permanent members of the U.N.Security Council endorsed this decision is sure to generate tension in thecouncil. Now with the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Iran nuclear dealthere will be further questions about the U.S. and its commitment toagreements pertaining to the global economy and security.Third, once again we have witnessed the pendulum swinging from oneadministration to the other.The reconciliation attempt and the nuclear deal with Iran that angered U.S.allies during the Barack Obama administration was terminated by the Trumpadministration.The Iran-centered approach of the Obama administration shifted the Israeland Saudi centered approach of the George Bush administration.This pattern paves the way for increasing inconsistency and contradictionin foreign policy of successive U.S. administrations.It also leads to dangerous shifts that can destabilize the region, generaterapid changes of attitude in the countries of the region and createincreasing militarization.Fourth, the decision-making process for this nuclear deal revealedconfusion and conflict among different agencies in Washington. In the last18 months, the chronic problem of interagency disputes in U.S. foreignpolicy reached a new height by sudden and unexpected contradictorystatements by the different agencies and actors in Washington.It has been reported that intelligence agencies think the Iraniangovernment did not violate the agreement and some influential actors, suchas Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, expressed that the U.S. should notwithdraw from the agreement.The decision was insisted on by Trump and his inner circle.These interagency disputes generate significant problems for theformulation and implementation of U.S. foreign policy and create mixedmessages for the international community.Finally, this decision without a broader strategy or plan leads to seriousproblems for U.S. foreign policy. For the last several years, the mostsignificant foreign policy problems have been the absence of strategy andpresence of tactics and rhetoric that drives it.Once again, it is not clear what Washington’s plan of action in the regionis, including how to deal with the regional expansion of Iran and itsdestabilizing activities in neighboring countries conducted throughproxies. It is also not clear what the next step will be for the Iraniannuclear deal.In light of all these points, Trump’s decision generates more questionsthan answers for the future of U.S. foreign policy. Combined with earlierunilateral actions lacking strategies, it could create serious problems forWashington.By: Kilic Bugra Kanat