In his seminal article published nearly 30 years ago, cleverly called “Second Image Reversed,” Peter Gourevitch outlined a set of arguments for why and how to study the international causes of domestic outcomes. This framework had a profound effect on several literatures, but only a minor ripple in the study of regime change. A handful of international relations scholars, including John Owen and Mark Peceny, have made important contributions to this field, and a smattering of comparativists have added the international dimension to their list of independent variables that influence regime type, but the subject could not be considered a mainstream field. In fact, the third-wave transitologists gave only passing attention to the international dimensions of democratization. Laurence Whitehead did write an important chapter on international dimensions of democratization in the four-volume study on transitions from autocratic rule edited by Louillermo O'Donnell, Philippe C. Schmitter, and Lawrence Whitehead. Yet, in one of the introductory essays in this study, Schmitter wrote that one “of the firmest conclusions that emerged … was that transitions from authoritarian rule and immediate prospects for political democracy were largely to be explained in terms of national forces and calculations. External actors tended to play an indirect and usually marginal role” (in O'Donnell, Schmitter, and Whitehead, eds., Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Southern Europe, 1986, p. 5). Scholars and policy analysts writing about democratization after the end of the Cold War have devoted more attention to international factors, yet the subject is still grossly neglected. This absence of scholarship is all the more surprising given the foreign policy debates in Washington, Brussels, Moscow, and Tehran about the role the United States in fostering “regime change.”

If one book can fill this void, it is International Democracy and the West. This important book offers readers a comprehensive review of both the theoretical literature as to why regime type matters for international security and prosperity and an exhaustive accounting of the different kinds of international influences on domestic political development. Richard Youngs manages to bridge the artificial gap between comparative politics and international relations in a manner that should interest scholars in both subfields.

The book begins by reviewing the theoretical debates about the relationship between domestic regime type and international security and international investment. The restatement of the democratic peace debate will be familiar to most international relations scholars, though the author's discussion of this debate is sophisticated, nuanced, and succinct, making it especially useful for teaching purposes. Less familiar will be his discussion about the relationship between regime type and regime change, on the one hand, and international investor behavior, on the other. Most provocatively, Youngs seeks to demonstrate “growing support from international capital for more democratic systems” (p. 16) in the 1990s. He assembles the arguments for why some international investors preferred what he calls “low intensity” democracy, a system in which a strong executive and weak parliament can work closely with international financial institutions to check populist demands and carry out economic reforms needed to stimulate growth and attract foreign investment. In sum, Chapter 1 ends by suggesting why democracy is good for peace and good for prosperity.

Chapter 2 then traces how these theoretical arguments influenced the foreign policies of the Western powers in the 1990s. Youngs shows that a greater appreciation for the importance of democratic development did influence American and European international actions in the 1990s in new ways. For instance, the 1994 United Nations–led intervention in Haiti marked a unique historical moment in which military force was used to “defend democracy.” He also shows how punitive democratic conditionality seeped into Western treaties and agreements in the 1990s, while budgets for democratic assistance also increased dramatically in this same period. In this discussion of democracy and Western strategic interests, Youngs also chronicles some of the debates regarding the “hard” cases, such as China, Iran, Iraq, and Algeria, showing in a careful way that the growing attention given to democracy promotion does not translate neatly into effective or consistent policy.

Chapter 3 provides a similar discussion of strategy for international business in promoting transparent and responsible government. This chapter covers issues and activities not often included in research about democracy promotion. And that is exactly the author's point—it is not only states and nongovernmental organizations that can influence regime change but also international business. As he acknowledges, the new ideas about the positive benefits of democratic expansion have influenced the international business community to a lesser extent than they have impacted the foreign policies of Western states. But the impact is still noticeable and not trivial, especially regarding the Corporate Social Responsibility agenda that emerged in the 1990s. Youngs demonstrates that corporate leaders began to feel the negative and unpredictable consequences of autocratic rule and governance breakdown, including unchecked corruption, privileged treatment for local companies with ties to the dictator, seizure of property rights under the banner of nationalism, restrictions on foreign investment, and general instability. The discussion, however, ends inconclusively. While explaining why business should have an interest in democracy, or more modestly, good governance, and also suggesting through some anecdotal evidence that some business leaders have modified their behavior to reflect a greater concern for good governance, Youngs ends by admitting that “significant variation on democracy-related debates emerged between MNCs [multinational corporations] operating in different sectors and from different home countries” (p. 127). He has outlined a research agenda about changing corporate strategies that more detailed studies of business decision making must now advance.

In Chapter 4, Youngs then extends his analysis of strategies of democracy promotion to international NGOS. In the chapters on governments and business, he seems to be looking hard for evidence of the impact of new ideas about the benefits of democracy on policy. In this chapter, somewhat surprisingly, he finds less concern for pressing for democracy since the international NGOs discussed want to keep their focus on human rights and maintain their distance from government-driven efforts to promote democracy. The finding is counterintuitive, especially as the reader—after reading about new government and business strategies for promoting democracy—is poised to think that the NGO community should be even more concerned with pushing democracy.

As an analysis of the strategies followed by governments, business, and NGOs to promote democracy, this book has no equal. What is especially refreshing is the inclusion of non-American actors and the private sector into the analysis. The book does not, however, evaluate the impact of these changing strategies on cases of democratization or democratic consolidation (or the lack thereof) in any systematic way. It is to be hoped that such an analysis will be the subject of Youngs's next book. No one is more qualified to undertake such a much-needed study.