NEWS ANALYSIS : Despite Coup’s Failure, Venezuelan Democracy Is at Risk : Leadership: President and others may mistakenly see repudiation of rebellion by public as an endorsement of a corrupt political system.

The future of Venezuela’s democratic system remains in mortal danger, even though it survived two military coup attempts in less than a year, because the country’s leaders may have learned the wrong lessons, diplomatic and key political sources say.

Interviews with informed, influential foreign and Venezuelan sources in the wake of last weekend’s failed attack on the government of President Carlos Andres Perez leave an impression of a political system so gutted by corruption and self-absorption that it virtually invites yet another military intervention.

“It is not just Perez,” said a senior Latin American diplomat. “He is seen as a symbol of what is rotten, but the real problem is a political system that is perceived as serving only the corrupt and inefficient politicians. These coups (including the Feb. 4 attempt) are the result of a frustrated and angry public, which feels their lives are being ruined by people who only want power and privilege.

“They see no hope for themselves or their children,” the diplomat added. “So they are ripe for a leader, even a dictator, who promises them stability, good services and a decent income.”

The focus of discontent is a 3-decade-old political system in which the only popular participation has been in periodic voting.

Party leaders, who appointed themselves, privately selected candidates whose names never appeared on the ballots. Policies were implemented with almost no legislative involvement. The government, fed by revenues from the world’s third-largest oil-producing fields, became corrupt and inefficient. And, with the drop in petroleum prices over the last decade, the government has been unable to maintain the services and programs that had placated the public.

“The parties involved themselves in every aspect of life, but they never allowed the people to take part in what decisions were taken, what candidates were selected, what policies were made. It was Big Brother, and the people are sick of it,” said a onetime head of a presidential commission.

A sign of the popular loathing for the system came in the 1989 elections, when only 35% of voters turned out in Caracas and just 50% in the rest of the country.

Another test of the system comes this Sunday with elections for legislative and municipal offices. Perez is said to be counting on a large turnout as both an endorsement of the system over the military option and a sign of popular support for his government.

“Flash polls” taken five days after the coup indicate he is wrong on both counts. “If that holds up, they are in serious, serious trouble,” said a Latin American ambassador. “It could mean the end of 30 years of democracy in one of the region’s most important countries.”

Historian Arturo Yuslar Pietri observed: “We have been ready for a fall for a long time. I am opposed to military intervention, but I can understand the forces that led to the coups.”

In the Latin American diplomat’s opinion--shared by other important envoys and Venezuelan observers--the only reason the two rebellions collapsed was that the public was too uncertain and frightened to support them. “These were the wrong people,” said another influential ambassador, “and they screwed things up so badly that they defeated themselves. It was their own fault, not the strength of the government or the loyalty of the people to democracy.”

For the moment, the shock of the more recent coup, which took at least 230 lives, seems to have left the country stunned and too confused to do much more than complain. “Right now there is no chance” for a successful coup, said a former Venezuelan diplomat and prominent lawyer. “But if there are no changes in the next three or four months, the people will support a military government.”

“Exactly,” echoed another lawyer, one of the country’s leading constitutional experts. “I don’t think we will even reach the next presidential election (in December, 1993). There will be a coup before then and a military government.”

The main reason why the weekend attack collapsed, several respected observers said, was the failure of the coup plotters to present a respectable, ranking military officer as a leader. Instead, they said, when rebels from the air force seized the nation’s television stations, the coup spokesmen were crudely dressed men whose appearance and violent actions frightened and repelled the public instead of galvanizing support.

And while nearly all those interviewed said the crisis goes beyond the policies and perception of Perez and focuses on deep-rooted institutional failings, the discussion inevitably turned to the president when questions were raised about the causes of the country’s frustrations and bitterness.

“All of the political leaders are out of touch with the people,” said a former ambassador. “But Perez has lost touch with reality, and that is a tragedy for Venezuela.”

The problem, a former presidential adviser said, “is that Perez actually thinks his position was enhanced by the coup attempts” because the people did not support the rebels. “He ignores the fact that in neither February nor last Friday did anyone come into the streets on his behalf.”

The onetime diplomat said what is most worrisome is the president’s belief that “he really is doing well and that he can go on doing business as usual. He thought the coup’s failure was an endorsement and expression of gratitude by the people.”

Self-satisfaction was evident Tuesday at a news conference Perez had with foreign reporters. “I represent democracy,” he said several times. “My presence in the presidency is a sign of the stability of Venezuelan democracy.”

Although he said there had been “errors and mistakes,” particularly in the implementation of a harsh economic reform program, Perez dismissed questions about such failures as unimportant. This brought sighs of resignation from one prominent attorney who watched the news conference and expressions of alarm from another.

“If he stays just as he is now, if he continues to think he is in paradise, there will be another coup,” said the constitutional expert.