Still a bit too 21st century US perspective. Latin America has hundreds of years of domination by colonial powers, with the Bolivar revolution hitting Venezuela in 1811-1821, even before our Monroe Doctrine of 1823 (strengthened by Grover Cleveland)  turned Latin America into a single-player system. After that they had 170 years of brutal wars and coups.

The implication being, Venezuela's issues have much more to do with its history, and little to do with even the US or power-consolidating trends elsewhere.  (I'd hardly consider Putin a populist-turned-authoritarian - probably the reverse).

First, Chavez's foremost enemy was poverty, and he did very well in fighting it, even granting that Venezuela had oil as a tool - most oil-rich countries have still botched wealth & equality, and Venezuela post-Chavez looks on its way to do the same.

Second & related, landowners (estancieros) & subsequently industrial captains and corporations always held the strings in Latin America, whether the church, the dictator himself like Somoza, or an influential cartel that pulled the strings. Chavez came into power through a fortuitous collapse of the controlling powers with their incompetence too obvious, and he took the opportunity (elected) to not only rise to power, but to implement some pretty decent reforms when the others looked too incompetent.

Third, the high frequency of coup in Venezuela and throughout Latin America - including our sponsored attempted coup in 2002 -  makes Chavez's concerns in the face of protests, media-fed opposition and foreign mischief highly realistic & pragmatic. While his populism is not unusual for Latin America, his perceived attention to his own people no doubt strengthened his position as US-subsidized attacks and investment flight and other pressures mounted.

The US under Bush came looking for Chavez, not the other way around. Sure Chavez was clever in using the situation to the best of his ability, invoking 200 years of US meddling to remind his publicum of their situation, but it's not like they needed to be reminded - US meddling in this sphere is never waning (read "Erendira and her Heartless Grandmother" or the equally impressive movie for an image of Latin America forced to whore itself to pay off the debts imposed by the Yanquis themselves)

Anyway, the purpose of this piece wasn't all that - it was simply that Venezuela as a "security threat" to the US is pointedly absurd - they threaten the US not in the slightest, and it's the disturbing co-option of language meant for real protection into our glib self-justifying surveillance state sticks out - one script of rhetoric for any situation - trot it out, read it, let the media amplify it, and it will be accepted as gospel.