Policy Selection in the Face of Political Instability: Do States Divert, Repress, or Make Concessions?

This article bridges the divide between comparative politics and international relations by examining the interaction between domestic instability and policy choices made at the domestic and international level. It is theorized that leaders select from a basket of options that include diversion, repression, and political concessions. It is argued that governmental institutions affect political leaders choices, with more domestically constrained democratic governments eschewing the use of repression, instead opting for diversion and concessions. Whereas autocratic governments will use repression as it is the most effective and least costly option. Using a panel vector autoregression model, the study tests whether political leaders use one or a mixture of responses when confronted with widespread dissatisfaction. The analysis models feedback loops enabling it to simultaneously evaluate the effectiveness of those strategies at reducing instability within the different institutional contexts. The study found little evidence of diversion, but it did find that the international environment affects both policy choices and affected the level of instability in the state. The use of concessions for all states is generally counterproductive when that state is involved in a strategic rivalry whereas they tend to reduce instability when both democracies and autocracies are in a more peaceful international environment.