<p>What kind of authoritarian states are more effective in preventing the emergence of territorial contenders and establishing exclusive control over territories? Regime durability has long been a central subject of research in the study of authoritarian politics, and scholars have identified various factors that contribute to the survival of authoritarian regimes. However, less attention has been paid to why some authoritarian regimes are more successful than others in maintaining exclusive territorial control. The loss of exclusive territorial authority, often manifested in the rise of territorial contenders, poses significant threats to regime survival. To fill this gap, this article examines how regime origin affects authoritarian effectiveness in avoiding the rise of territorial contenders. The central argument is that regimes with violent origins are equipped with unique advantages preventing the emergence of such contenders, as hostile external environments heighten their incentive to pursue territorial consolidation to mitigate external threats, and high levels of centralization and strong organizational capacity inherited from wartime experience enable them to extract sufficient resources and use them to strengthen territorial control in remote areas. Results from quantitative analysis and case studies on the Rwandan Patriotic Front and the Communist Party of Cuba provide evidence supporting this argument. This study not only contributes to the study of state territorial control but also deepens our understanding of the impact of authoritarian regime origins.</p>