In 2002–03, President George W. Bush presented the United Nations with an interesting test of relevance. If the Security Council did not endorse the ultimatum to force Iraqi compliance on American terms, he warned, Washington would reserve the right to launch a full-fledged military assault on its own. Analysts and commentators wondered: would the United Nations lift its performance and remain relevant to the US foreign policy on Washington’s terms, or in doing so would it risk being seen as bending to the US will without demanding American compliance with global norms from arms control to environmental regimes and international criminal justice; that is, a quintessentially unilateralist version of multilateralism?