If television evangelist Pat Robertson's controversial statements suggesting that the U.S. send in a covert operative to take out Chavez were not just the words of a madman but a trial balloon floated for the administration, the firestorm that met them should stay the president's hand even though, in the bellicose preacher's words, "It is cheaper than starting another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. . .and I don't think any oil shipments will stop.

We may have "the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability," as Robertson says, but with the administration's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and its saber-rattling towards Korea and Iran, one would think Bush has his hands full.

Hugo Chavez has set up medical clinics in the poorest neighborhoods in his country, staffing them with Cuban doctors, not that that United States has offered any medical assistance. He has created school music programs that have resulted in lower street crime and a resurgence of classical music: The would-be delinquents are spending their time practicing the violin instead of knocking over old ladies. The nerve of that guy! Wasting our money-or at least the money we pay for oil from Venezuela-on such effete solutions to social problems!

More to the point, his administration has kept entrepreneurs from controlling the oil industry and sucking out all the profits to make themselves wealthy. Chavez has kept a tight rein on it, reinvesting the money for the benefit of the Venezuelan people. He has successfully responded to the needs of its citizens in ways that have made his socialist ideas very popular; the people have elected him twice and overcome a coup against him.

The proper role of the government is to protect and make the best use of a nation's resources for its citizens. There is nothing in our Constitution about making the most money for a politician's supporters. In fact, the Constitution specifically mandates that we "promote the general Welfare." There's nothing communist about it.

The United States has a number of genuine problems with Hugo Chavez. First of all, government control of the oil industry shuts out entrepreneurs and foreign investors-think of Standard Oil, Gulf Oil, and Exxon. Secondly, it has the second largest oil reserve in the Americas. Canada, with 171 billion barrels of oil is first, though second in the world to Saudi Arabia. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Venezuela holds the ninth place in oil reserves with 77 billion barrels of oil. It is also extremely important to the U.S. in part because of its proximity. Recently, we have purchased more of Venezuela's oil than anyone has.

Chavez's trolling for other markets threatens America's access to Venezuelan oil even more though both he and his representatives have been very clear that they are not planning to reduce exports to the U.S. Considering the presumably diminishing Saudi Arabian oil reserves, as well as China's and our increasing demand for oil, this is not an abstract threat except, he says, if we attempt to assassinate or overthrow him.

The Saudis, possessors of the largest oil reserves in the world are extremely secretive about the amount of oil still available in their reserves. The U.S. government estimates that they have 261 billion barrels of oil but we cannot know for sure. They have good reason to play their cards so close to the vest: If they were to confirm that they are approaching their peak of production, it might spur the west to serious efforts to create alternative forms of fuel such as solar, wind and nuclear power. If those forms were to become widely available, it could cut into the Saudi market. It makes one wonder if Iran's claim that it is developing nuclear power because it is an alternative form of power is true. While Iran holds the world's fourth largest reserve of oil, with 126 billion barrels of oil, it would be exercising a rare form of prescience in planning for a future when that oil will be gone.

Aside from America's concerns about oil, Chavez has made a number of pronouncements that have irritated the administration and its friends. He has responded strongly to rumors that the U.S. is planning to invade Venezuela saying that he would stand up to any such invasion. Just what would Bush expect him to say?

Venezuela is right to publicize these rumors. If Cuba's experience with the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Cuban missile crisis and subsequent assassination attempts on Castro; the CIA-sponsored coups against Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954 and against Allende in Chile in 1972 are any measure of our government's willingness to disregard international law for our own ends, Chavez cannot take these rumors lightly particularly with the trigger-happy Bush at the helm.

It is not just the history of American state-sponsored terrorism about which Venezuela is justified in worrying but the arrogant expectation that any government or leader that disagrees with us poses a risk to the American way of life. Latin American leaders are especially endangered.

As Pat Robertson observed, "We have the Monroe Doctrine, and we have other doctrines that we have announced, and without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil that could hurt us very badly.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt officially repudiated the Monroe Doctrine in 1934 ending U.S. interventionism in Latin America and replacing it with his "Good Neighbor" policy. Those damnable Democrats! But remember that President Gerald Ford issued an Executive Order that banned U.S. Government agents from assassinating foreign leaders.

In September 2001, in the wake of the attacks on the World Trade Center, President Bush rescinded that order and lowered the standard of proof for assassinations to those merely "suspected" of being terrorists. But long before George W. Bush became president the U.S had disregarded its Good Neighbor policy with interventions in Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, and the Dominican Republic, to name a few.

Golda Meir famously said, "Even paranoids have enemies." Whatever mainstream America may think of Hugo Chavez, he is right to be wary.

Dr. Rosa Maria Pegueros is an associate professor of history at the University of Rhode Island. She may be reached at pegueros@uri.edu

###