Justifying Repression in Authoritarian Regimes of the Arab World: Official Framing and Target Audiences

专制研究通常将压制和合法化分析为不同的策略。然而，威权政权中的国家官员不仅诉诸暴力来维护权力，而且经常试图为针对不同受众的镇压行为辩护。现有的研究还没有将威权主义的这一方面概念化。对一些群体的镇压可能会导致其他目标受众的支持，从而有助于维护威权政权。反过来，试图为自己辩护的失败可能会引发愤怒和更高的动员。该项目试图通过提出一个全面调查镇压理由的新框架来填补独裁政体在政治沟通方面的这一概念空白。它试图回答相关问题，即镇压如何是正当的，为什么在镇压阿拉伯起义抗议活动中选择某些理由，以及这些理由的效果如何。对突尼斯和摩洛哥进行有组织、有重点的比较，可以看出2010-2011年阿拉伯起义期间的类似抗议活动是如何导致政府官员以不同的理由做出镇压回应的。将使用的方法包括内容和框架分析、过程跟踪、与档案工作的实地研究以及定性的半结构访谈。该项目通过绘制2001至2010年间突尼斯和摩洛哥对不同对手的镇压是合理的来阐述。列出了不同地区针对目标的镇压事件和事件的数据集，作为比较威权政权在三个不同领域的镇压框架的基础：除了行政部门使用的镇压之外，还分析了引入反恐法律的理由。该项目还仔细审查了法庭审判和对持不同政见者的裁决中给出的理由。历史概述为随后的分析提供了背景。进程追踪的目的是调查突尼斯和摩洛哥阿拉伯起义抗议期间各种具体理由的原因和影响。此外，还分析了官方陷害和抗议者反陷害的动态。当公民和国际社会拒绝或接受威权国家的镇压行为时，国内和国际目标受众的反应是有启发性的。该项目的主要创新是以启发式模式将镇压的理由概念化，该模式也可以适用于其他情况。这些发现有望为抗议和镇压研究做出贡献。此外，对各领域压制的差异化分析也超越了已有的研究成果。权威主义研究将受益于框架方法的应用，但主要得益于对国内和国际目标受众的创新考虑。这为如何利用镇压来维持威权主义提供了一个动态而复杂的视角。

Autocracy research usually analyses repression and legitimation as separate strategies. However, state officials in authoritarian regimes not only resort to brute force for maintaining power, but often attempt to justify repressive acts towards different audiences. Existing research has not conceptualized this aspect of authoritarianism. The repression of some groups may lead to support by other target audiences, contributing to authoritarian regime maintenance. In turn, failing attempts at justification may trigger outrage and higher mobilization. The project seeks to fill this conceptual gap of political communication in autocracies by presenting a novel framework to comprehensively investigate justifications of repression. It seeks to answer the related questions of how repression is justified and why and with what effect certain justifications were chosen in the repression of Arab uprising protests. A structured, focused comparison of Tunisia and Morocco shows how similar protests during the Arab uprisings in 2010-2011 led to repressive responses with diverging justifications by state officials. The methods that will be used include content and frame analysis, process tracing, and field research with archival work as well as qualitative semi-structured interviews.The project sets out by mapping how repression against different opponents was justified in Tunisia and Morocco between 2001 and 2010. A dataset listing repressive episodes and incidents against targets in different regions serves as the basis for comparing authoritarian regimes’ framing of repression in three different areas: In addition to repression employed by the executive, the justifications upon the introduction of antiterror laws are analyzed. The project also scrutinizes the justifications given in court trials and verdicts against dissenters. The historical overview contextualizes the subsequent analysis. Process tracing serves to investigate the reasons for and effects of the specific mix of justifications during the protests of the Arab uprisings in Tunisia and Morocco. Also the dynamics of official framing and protesters’ counterframing are analysed. The reactions by domestic and international target audiences are enlightening as to when citizens and the international community reject or accept repressive acts by authoritarian regimes.The project’s major innovation is the conceptualization of justifications of repression in a heuristic model that can be applied to other contexts as well. The findings are expected to contribute to protest and repression research. Also the differentiated analysis of repression in various areas surpasses existing works. Authoritarianism research will benefit from the application of the framing approach, but mostly from the innovative consideration of domestic and international target audiences. This offers a dynamic and complex perspective on how repression can be used to sustain authoritarianism.