Next Step : Will Ballots Lead to Bullets in Venezuela? : Military leaders distrust the leading candidate, former President Rafael Caldera, and fear his leftist rival, many say. A history of coup attempts is worrisome.

Hopes that Venezuela’s upcoming exercise in democracy--next month’s national elections--will end the country’s explosive political crisis have been dashed by a vitriolic campaign and increasing fears of a military takeover if the front-running presidential candidate wins.

“I thought it was a lot of crap,” said a visiting banker of the coup speculation. “This is a country with 30 years of solid democracy, lots of oil, educated workers and a leader in modernizing its economy. But after talking to business and political leaders, I’m really concerned.”

“A coup is more than paranoid fear,” said a hemispheric diplomat. “I would bet on one if Velasquez wins, and the odds are at least even if it’s Caldera.”

He was referring first to Andres Velasquez, the presidential candidate of Causa R (Radical Cause), a relatively new leftist party composed of several former guerrillas, and then to Rafael Caldera, a former chief of state who heads a collection of small parties called Convergencia, and whose populist campaign has made him the likely winner.

“Both are seen as dangers,” said an international businessman, “Velasquez because he is seen as a Communist-inspired leftist who would destroy the country, and Caldera because the military thinks he would be so disruptive that the country’s already fragile system would utterly collapse.”

While many experts say they expect or at least hope the country will “muddle through,” as one political consultant put it, they all acknowledge that the trepidation over a coup is justified.

Rebellious military units in league with radical leftist groups have tried twice in the last 22 months to take power, including bombing raids of the presidential palace. Only the determined opposition of the military high command prevented the overthrow of then-President Carlos Andres Perez, first in February, 1992, and again last November.

What makes the current situation even more unstable and dangerous, in the minds of diplomats and leading Venezuelan political figures and analysts, is the possibility that a new coup would be led by the same senior officers who forcibly ended the previous two revolts.

“What has them on the edge are the signs inside the high command that the generals are tired of all the problems and may decide the only answer is a military regime,” according to Lucy Gomez, an economic and political specialist for El Universal, Venezuela’s largest newspaper.

Gomez said Caldera has angered not only the military but the old-line political Establishment by proposing a new constitution that, among other changes, would give the president the power to dissolve Congress if he decided the lawmakers were not following the will of the people.

She and other analysts say likely excuses for military action would be an outbreak of election-related violence or charges of widespread voter fraud. Riots and demonstrations accompanied local elections earlier this year.

Feeding this assessment was an announcement by Defense Minister Adm. Radames Munoz Leon that 65,000 troops would be used to police the elections and that “repressive measures” would be employed to prevent demonstrations.

The warning was couched in terms of protecting the vote, but the military is seen by many as waging “a dirty war” against politicians it dislikes, especially Velasquez and Causa R, which army intelligence officers charge has been acquiring arms.

*

Adding to the alarm is ambivalence among some business and civilian political figures about the ability of democracy to deal with Venezuela’s problems, which include a falling standard of middle-class living, a serious rise in poverty (45% of the population is considered seriously malnourished), a breakdown in public services and blatant levels of government and private corruption.

“Sometimes I think these things run in cycles,” said one Venezuelan lawyer, who asked not to be named since he holds a temporary position in the interim government.

“We’ve had democracy for a long time and now we’re exhausted. Maybe it’s time for a new cycle” of military-led stability, he said. “At least we’ve got to do something to establish order in the government, and these elections aren’t going to provide it.”

“It’s that kind of talk that drives us wild,” said a diplomat who is among those who have been in constant motion the last several weeks trying to convince the military and the ambivalent civilian sectors that the United States and the rest of the democratic world would not look favorably on a coup.

“Not only do we have to make sure the military doesn’t think it can get away with a golpe (Spanish for an armed forces takeover), but we have to convince people who should know better that we won’t accept anything but legitimate democracy,” the diplomat added.

“They’ve been told (the United States) will stop buying their oil and take other actions to punish them,” including a threat to exclude Venezuela from expected future plans to expand the North American Free Trade Agreement into South America, said another diplomat. The U.S. currently purchases 60% of Venezuela’s oil production.

These diplomats acknowledge that the threats aren’t necessarily having the desired effect. “We’ve been hurt by Haiti and Somalia,” said a foreign expert. “Many people here don’t think (the United States) has either the will or the ability to take serious action, particularly because they don’t believe Washington wants Caldera to win.”

There is some truth to that assessment. Under Perez, Venezuela was a leader in Latin America in rejecting old policies of protectionism; an economy directed, controlled and subsidized by the government, and high levels of nationalized industry.

To applause from the United States, Canada and Western Europe, Perez starting in 1989 enacted extensive measures to turn the country toward a free-market economy that welcomed lower tariffs and encouraged foreign investment.

Perez’s program, called the paquete (package), caused severe dislocations in the economy. And while there has been a strong recovery and economic growth the last two years, popular resentment--as voiced by Caldera--has been strong.

The resulting unrest has been fed by a growing and often violent reaction to the popular perception that politicians in general and Perez in particular are corrupt. It was this feeling that led Congress earlier this year to drive Perez from office on grounds that he had misappropriated several million dollars in government funds.

Caldera, who served as president from 1968 to 1973, has gained popularity by promising to reverse much of Perez’s program, destroy the privileges of the traditional political structure and restore Venezuela to the prosperity it enjoyed when oil revenues seemed unlimited.

In addition, Caldera, whose reputation for honesty stands out in a country where high-level politicians often leave office much richer than when they came in, has effectively tapped a public perception that the old parties are exhausted and the cause of much of the nation’s problems.

“It is amazing,” said Gomez, the newspaper economic and political specialist, “that Caldera is now seen as the outsider and represents radical change.” She was referring to the fact that Caldera was the founder and longtime leader of the Social Christian Party, or Copei, which has basically rotated power with Perez’s Democratic Action since Venezuela’s turn to democracy in the 1950s.

“I don’t know if it’s just campaign rhetoric or he means it,” said one international businessman of Caldera’s promises to dismantle Perez’s program, “but I fear with Caldera you get what you see.”

It is widely assumed here that the United States opposes Caldera because of concern he will reverse the economic course of his predecessor--an assumption that the American Embassy here denies.

*

The 77-year-old former president leads in most polls, usually by a 10% margin. Next is Oswaldo Alvarez Paz, Copei’s free-market candidate, followed closely by the leftist Velasquez.

While there is a large enough undecided vote in the polls to suggest that Alvarez Paz can still win, the consensus is that Caldera will prevail.

“He has led constantly with a solid bloc,” said an international businessman, “and the others seem to be stuck. Caldera may get only 30-35%, but it probably will be enough.”

Caldera has recently tried to ease the military’s concerns, pointing out that he enjoyed good relations with the armed forces when he was president before. And while he has taken a populist line in the campaign, at least some of his economic advisers are considered conservative.

It may be wishful thinking, one international businessman acknowledged, but there is a theory that Caldera, as president, would be so trapped by both existing law and economic realities that he would be unable to do anything radical.

“I still have hope,” said one diplomat, “that a combination of international pressure, the realization that Caldera can’t really do anything radical, and Venezuelan democratic tradition will prevail. I don’t expect it, but that’s what I hope.”