Why do some authoritarian governments respond beneficently to political protest while others opt for repression? This article argues that beneficent government responses in the form of concessions or institutional inclusion are fostered by three interrelated mechanisms working at three distinct levels: institutionalization of political protest within the polity, external certification of protest demands by legally legitimized authorities, and interest polarization between protesting groups and the government. Empirical comparison of government responses to youth protests before and during the 2011 uprisings in Morocco and Egypt proves that the divergent strategies in the two countries were not the result of spontaneous decision-making in times of heightened regime contention. Rather, they mirror established patterns of protest politics that are relatively resistant to ad-hoc manipulations. By extending the focus beyond a particular episode of contention, this study offers important insights into government-challenger relations in authoritarian regimes.

中文翻译：

---

处理争夺：政府对阿拉伯世界青年抗议活动的不同回应

为什么有些专制政府对政治抗议采取善意的回应，而另一些政府选择镇压？本文认为，让步或制度包容形式的善意政府回应是通过三个相互关联的机制在三个不同的层次上进行的：政治内部的政治抗议制度化，合法合法当局对抗议要求的外部证明以及抗议之间的利益两极化团体和政府。政府对摩洛哥和埃及2011年暴动之前和期间对青年抗议活动的反应的经验比较表明，在政权争夺加剧时，两国的分歧战略并非自发决策的结果。相当，他们反映了相对抵制临时操纵的既定的抗议政治模式。通过将焦点扩展到特定争论点之外，本研究为威权政权中政府与挑战者之间的关系提供了重要见解。