Last week two officers from Venezuela's armed forces made public criticisms of President Chavez' style of government. The first, Colonel Pedro Soto, accused Mr Chavez of controlling Parliament, the Supreme Court and the Armed Forces and said he should resign. When military police attempted to apprehend the Colonel, protestors gathered to prevent his arrest. He was followed the next day by Captain Pedro Flores from the National Guard, who accused the President of endangering the country's democratic system through corruption and attacks on the media, the Church and the 'rule of law.' He added that his feelings were widely shared in the military, a claim which General Lucas Rincon, the head of the armed forces was quick to deny.

For its part, the Government wasted no time in dismissing the new round of rumours of a military coup to which the officers' denunciations had given rise. However, even if it is true that there is no restlessness in the Venezuelan military at the present time, as Mr Teodoro Petkoff told Reuters last week, "The increasingly deep political crisis in the country now has a military element that cannot be concealed." President Chavez himself, of course, has a military background; his first attempt to come to power was through the barrel of a gun in 1992. Last week a mass rally was held on the tenth anniversary of his failed coup, the culmination of four days of festivities during which he and his supporters retraced the route the rebel soldiers had taken in their bid to overthrow President Carlos Andres Perez. This was not, one might have thought, the action of a committed democrat. However, Mr Chavez responded to his critics by saying that the 1992 attempted coup marked the "resurrection of Venezuela."

The Venezuelan President has insisted all along that he believes in democracy, that he is not a communist and that he does not back terrorism. "Lies, lies," he has thundered in response to allegations to the contrary. Not everyone, however, is convinced. At home, he is at odds with the middle class, the business sector, the trade union leaders, the news media and the Roman Catholic Church - a broad spectrum one might have thought - while abroad he has even drawn public criticism from the United States.

His country's status as the number two oil supplier of the US did not prevent him from earning a rebuke from Washington following statements he made after September 11. Even the normally cautious US Secretary of State Colin Powell was moved to remark recently that Mr Chavez "drops in on some of the strangest countries to visit." This was a reference to his visits to states like Iraq and his warm relations with Cuba. President Fidel Castro is a close personal friend and has deemed him "The greatest democrat in South America."

Mr Chavez calls himself a "social revolutionary," and says that the opposition he is facing comes from his attempts to redistribute wealth to the poor. In his campaign against the "oligarchs" and corruption, he has reformed the constitution, got passed, or is about to get passed radical legislation like a bill to redistribute land, and has changed the character of leading institutions. For the implementation of his programmes, he is heavily dependant on the military, bypassing the appropriate traditional civilian agencies.

For Guyanese it is a story with a vaguely familiar ring to it - an obsession with the distribution of wealth, rather than with producing it in the first place, and the subversion of the institutions of the state. For all its noble motivation, it is not the way to reinforce democracy, strengthen its institutions and fight corruption. Complicated states like Venezuela need multiple, strong institutions; one man cannot effect change for the better on his own.

As things stand, the economic status of most Venezuelans is worse than it was when Mr Chavez came to power first in 1998. The public protests to his government are growing, and according to the latest opinion poll, his popularity rating has plummeted from 80% four years ago, to around 35% today.

The protests, the President's statements, the nervousness of the business community and the uncertainty about the future, have led to a dramatic falling off in investment, massive capital flight, and the inexorable slide in the value of the country's currency. That currency - the bolivar - might have to be devalued in the not too distant future. It has not helped either that the world prices for crude oil - the export on which the Venezuelan economy is grounded - are currently low.

Last week the ratings agency, Fitch, downgraded Venezuela's sovereign debt ratings. This reflected, said the agency, "the continued pressure on foreign exchange reserves from capital flight and the lack of appropriate economic policy action to restore confidence and stem the foreign exchange outflow."

A possibly troubled neighbour to the west is not good news for Guyana. In addition to all the other things which the administration needs to do in relation to the border and which have been advocated before by Stabroek News, it really should look at beefing up the Caracas mission. The present Ambassador has hardly any staff at his disposal, and given the large numbers of Guyanese living on the other side of the Cuyuni river, his time must be almost fully taken up dealing with consular matters. In order to do his job effectively, he requires resources as well as personnel with diplomatic experience and political savvy. The administration cannot engage in contingency planning if it does not have access to sophisticated analysis of what is going on in the neighbouring capitals.

We were taken completely by surprise in the case of our eastern neighbour and CGX. We should learn from it.