The Trajectory of the Democratic Entitlement Thesis in International Legal Scholarship: A Reply to Akbar Rasulov

Abstract Akbar Rasulov’s provocative discussion of the ‘The Curious Case International Law Democracy and Politics Legal Scholarship’ makes two remarkable assertions: i) that critics democratic entitlement thesis won a decisive victory in contest to influence ‘the conventional wisdom’ within international legal scholarship; ii) critiques objectively served ‘a fundamentally reactionary political agenda’. Beyond overstating both critiques’ harshness their impact, Rasulov is too quick associate methodological orthodoxy with ‘right-wing’ outcomes, neglecting appreciate authors’ primary objective was resist neo-colonialist tendencies. Whereas departures from standard source doctrines may an earlier era have been directed towards redress power imbalances inherited colonialism, ‘pro-democratic’ post-Cold War tended license impositions on self-government poorer weaker states. The entitlement’s sought precisely conserve gains had by sectors community resistant neo-colonialism.