Last week, Stratfor published an analysis, “The Edge of the Razor,” that sketched out the problems facing the United States in Iraq. In an avalanche of responses, one important theme stood out: Readers wanted to know what we would do, if we were in a position to do anything. Put differently, it is easy to catalogue problems, more difficult to provide solutions.

The strategy of the United States in its war with radical Islam is in a state of crisis. The global strategic framework is in much better shape than the tactical situation in the Iraq theater of operations — but this is of only limited comfort to Washington because massive tactical failure in Iraq could lead to strategic collapse. The situation is balanced on the razor’s edge. The United States could recover from its tactical failures, or suffer a massive defeat if it fails to do so. One thing is certain: The United States cannot remain balanced on the razor’s edge indefinitely.

Significant uncertainty erupted in Chinese banking circles this week as reports circulated globally that the China Banking Regulatory Commission had suspended all lending for three days. This would effectively create a lending moratorium for well over a week due to the upcoming May Day celebration. The story, which appeared in the Wall Street Journal and other media, was quickly denied. However, Western media, including Agence France-Presse, are citing specific examples of Chinese banking officials who claim to have seen the order. Officials at the China Merchants Bank said they received the order from the CBRC -- and that it was issued by the Chinese Cabinet.

U.S. forces have reached a written cease-fire agreement with Sunni guerrillas operating in Al Fallujah. More than ending — or at least suspending — the battles in Al Fallujah, the cease-fire has turned the political situation in Iraq on its head, with the United States now positioned strategically between the majority Shia and the Sunni insurgents.

President George W. Bush’s press conference on Tuesday evening was fascinating in its generation of a new core justification for the Iraq campaign: building a democratic Iraq. It is unclear why Bush would find this a compelling justification for the invasion, but it is more unclear why the administration continues to generate unconvincing arguments for its Iraq policy, rather than putting forward a crisp, strategic and — above all — real justification.

The United States is involved in its greatest military crisis since the fall of Baghdad a year ago. This is the convergence of two separate processes. The first is the apparent re-emergence of the Sunni guerrillas west of Baghdad; the second is a split in the Shiite community and an internal struggle that has targeted the United States. In the worst-case scenario, these events could have a disastrous outcome for the United States, but there are reasons to think that the worst case is not the most likely at this point.

On March 29, NATO took in seven new member states. The enlargement ensures that the NATO of the future will work as a reliable arm of U.S. policy.

The United States is in the process of picking apart the intelligence and political failures that led up to the attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. on Sept. 11, 2001. This is an unprecedented process. Normally such reviews occur after the war has ended. In this case, the review was made necessary by the president’s failure to clean house after Sept. 11. That said, the truth of the matter would appear to be more complex than the simplistic charges being traded. The fact is, in our view, the Bush and Clinton policies were far more similar than they were different. We are not quite certain who we have insulted with that claim.

The March 11 attack in Spain indicates that al Qaeda still exists. It also indicates that al Qaeda has a strategy that strikes at the soft underbelly of the U.S. strategy in the war. The political success of the Spanish bombings will encourage al Qaeda and could lead to further militant attempts to work the fault line created in nations that joined the U.S. war in Iraq in an effort to disturb the U.S. alliance.

The war that began Sept. 11, 2001, has entered a new phase. The war in Iraq is reshaping itself, and that is redefining the entire conflict — and returning attention to Saudi Arabia.