Popular explanations for violent protests in Jammu and Kashmir hold some truth, but the reality is much more complex.

Until the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the American view of radical Islam and its many discontents was shaped more by the Middle East than South Asia. The U.S. has long been at odds with the raging Ayatollah in Iran, the murderous truck bomber in Lebanon and the masked Palestinian "freedom...

How could our "ally" aid our most vicious enemy? Pakistanis have offered many answers, with varying degrees of believability. The question facing Washington now is what to do with this wayward partner. At stake are three fundamental U.S. interests.

The vote against Sri Lanka at the United Nations Human Rights Council shows India can use its foreign policy to promote democracy in Asia.

India and Pakistan have announced that peace talks will resume. But until Pakistan rethinks its policy on terrorism, don't expect real progress.

One possible response to what is colloquially known as Pakistan's double game--fighting some terrorists while helping others--is to move from a strategy of engagement to one of containment.

Is Michael Bloomberg to blame for the deaths of the 18 Muslim men in Indian-controlled Kashmir who rioted over reports that someone in America burned the Koran?

There is cause for celebration in the death of a deeply evil man with much blood on his hands and more innocent deaths in his mind, but no cause to waver in our determination to press forward in this conflict against a determined foe.