Venezuela and its 'Anti-Bush'

I was cruising metafilter today and came across a post about Chavez and Venezuela, and the move by Bush to contain this guy.

I don't know how many of you have seen The Revolution Will Not Be Televised, but I highly recommend it as a peek behind the scenes of a failed coup attempt against Chavez (thought to be backed by the US), who has arguably brought some measure of democracy to a traditionally oligarchical distributive society in Venezuela.

Hugo Chavez assumed the presidency in Venezuela after a landslide victory in the 1998 elections there, and has kept power ever since by winning the hearts and minds of the enormous underclass of his country. He has attempted, and succeeded by some measures, to break the oligarchy of the extremely wealthy and powerful upper class by investing a portion of the oil revenues of Venezuela back into education and health care programs for the poor.

And basically, the Bush administration hates him and sees him as a threat for the following reasons:

Buschcon concerns are especially focused, however, on Chavez, for interesting reasons. Venezuela is a major oil producer whose popular and populist --- indeed now officially socialist ---- President Chavez is determined to defy Uncle Sam’s ancient claim to special low-cost access to Latin-America’s natural resources. It supplies nearly a sixth of US oil imports and the US buys 60 percent of Venezuela’s oil output. The Chavez government seeks full state government control over Venezuela’s oil sector and uses oil profits to --- imagine ---- eliminate poverty.

[snip]

In a region where anti-imperialist talk is cheap and policy tends to diverge from left-populist rhetoric, Chavez appears to be the real left deal. His accomplishments include a significant ongoing political mobilization of the poor and a considerable expansion of social welfare programs and investment that is improving the standard of living of Venezuela’s disadvantaged majority.

So Chavez is a guy who cares about the disadvantaged in his country, over the advantaged elite, and he's got oil revenues to back his philosophy. This definitely shouldn't equal "threat" in the eyes of the Bush Administration, so there must be something else going on which would prompt a tougher approach to the Chavez situation:

A strategy aimed at fencing in the government of the world’s fifth-largest oil exporter is being prepared at the request of President George W. Bush and Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, senior US officials say. The move signals a renewed interest by the administration in a region that has been relatively neglected in recent years.

[snip]

“Chávez is a problem because he is clearly using his oil money and influence to introduce his conflictive style into the politics of other countries,” Mr Pardo-Maurer said in an interview with the Financial Times.

[snip]

Mr Chávez, whose government has enjoyed bumper export revenues during his six years in office thanks to high oil prices, has denied that he is aiding insurgent groups in countries such as Bolivia, Colombia and Peru. But a tougher stance from the US appears to be in the offing, a move that is likely to worsen strained bilateral relations.

[snip]

Suggestions that Mr Chávez backs subversive groups surface frequently, although so far also with scant evidence. Colombian officials close to President Alvaro Uribe say Venezuela is giving sanctuary to Colombian guerrillas, deemed “terrorists” by the US and Europe.

Tough to say who is right/wrong in this situation. Depending on which source you look at, Chavez is either a savior, a "new Castro", or an iron fisted totalitarian.

Honestly, I'm sort of torn over the whole topic because I'm too cynical to believe or disbelieve one side or the other completely. I'm also pragmatic, and there seems to be very little pragmatism on either side of this issue. But as for the coup attempt, I have a friend who knows the documentary makers of "Televised", and they've claimed it's legitimate.

So who knows, but I think it's something interesting to keep an eye on, considering the Bush track record with uncooperative, oil producing countries.