>
Article snippet: The political news cycle is fast, and keeping up can be overwhelming. Trying to find differing perspectives worth your time is even harder. That’s why we have scoured the internet for political writing from the right and left that you might not have seen. Has this series exposed you to new ideas? Tell us how. Email us at ourpicks@nytimes.com. • Paul R. Pillar in The National Interest: “The bill is consistent with, and puts in stark relief, a larger problem of Congress habitually using economic sanctions against foreign states as an expression of disapproval that is poorly designed to achieve any U.S. foreign policy objectives.” Mr. Pillar argues that the real purpose of sanctions is that they allow politicians to pander to domestic constituencies against unpopular foreign entities. Bills such as the most recent sanctions legislation against Russia, North Korea and Iran are carelessly assembled and, he writes, “collide immediately with economic interests of U.S. allies in Europe.” Read more » _____ • Daniel Larison in The American Conservative: “Sanctions usually fail to change the behavior of the targeted government, but beyond that, they can have additional costs for the U.S. that are rarely considered.” Mr. Larison focuses on the repercussions that sanctions against Russia will have on the relationship between the United States and the European Union, noting that American allies in Europe “understandably resent having their companies punished for the behavior o... Link to the full article to read more