The upcoming October 7th elections in Venezuela do not constitute just another round of elections in another country. These elections are crucial for the future of Latin America and for the security of the United States. In fact, it is no exaggeration to point out that the Venezuelan drama should be as great a concern as the elections in the young democracies of the Middle East that emerged in the aftermath of the Arab spring. Unfortunately, the Venezuelan electoral process has been characterized by intimidation of the opposition and the press, violence, and indiscriminate use of state resources, all this with the objective of providing an advantage to Hugo Chavez.

In fact, two supporters of Henrique Capriles Radonsky, the opposition candidate challenging the President, were recently shot to death. Although Chavez and his interior Minister pledged to make every effort to bring the killers to justice, the case seems to follow an environment of intimidation and fear that has characterized the Chavez campaign. Opposition rallies have been blocked and undermined by pro-Chavez supporters and fistfights have been very common. Even the last killings took place at the time Chavez supporters blocked a motorcade of Capriles supporters. In September, Chavez supporters blocked a motorcade and burned a truck that belonged to the Capriles campaign. As polls have shown a tight race between the two contending sides, Mr. Capriles has proven himself adept at mobilizing large crowds. In the aftermath of the election, It seems almost inevitable that violence will increase especially if Chavez loses the race.

Experts have discussed possible scenarios in the aftermath of October 7th. They predict that if Chavez loses the election there might be a rise in violence, street protests, political hooliganism, and even sabotage of public services or invalidation of the election. So far, the Venezuelan government has rejected observers. A paper written by Dr. Ray Walser, a Senior Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, is called "The Chavez Plan to Steal the Venezuelan Election." In that document, Walser unequivocally defines the electoral process as an attempt by Chavez to win the election by non-legitimate means. Walser describes how Chavez has used state power and monopoly over the main natural resource (oil) to spend money to benefit people; how he has restricted the media and freedom of the press including laws that protect slander of the President; and how he has abused the electoral rules that limit air time for other presidential candidates.

Walser stresses that the electoral process has been flawed. Many voters have raised questions about whether their vote is really secret as their fingerprints, which are required as an anti-fraud mechanism, may be ultimately used to reveal the identity and the political choice of the voter. There is also concern about fraudulent registration of people who are not legally allowed to vote. I would add that violent scenarios could be created not only if Chavez loses but also even if Chavez wins. This is not necessarily because the opposition and Capriles supporters are violent but because if it is perceived that Chavez cheated, there will be rage similar to the one that took place in the Ukraine and some of the former Soviet satellites and Republics a few years ago. This sense of fraud might mobilize people who are tired of Chavez's chaotic and authoritarian rule.

In either case, Chavez is likely to mobilize his militias and paramilitary; violence will ensue but this time the presence of fire -arms will increase and we will see a situation of civil war. Not unlike what is now occurring in Syria. It will be interesting to see how the United States will respond should Venezuela erupt. In his paper, Walser urges the United States government to support civil society and continue to support NGO activity to train domestic electoral observers. Walser also urges the Administration to reaffirm their commitment to democracy and demand transparency. Likewise, he suggests that the United States work in coalition with other countries in the region and in Europe to act in unison in case of fraud or violence that might arise. Finally, Walser calls on the Administration to develop a plan of action that could include severe economic sanctions such as designating Venezuela a state sponsor of terrorism, thereby prohibiting the importation of Venezuelan oil. These recommendations are certainly right on target. We can only hope that countries such as Brazil, Colombia, Chile and a few others will stand on the side of democracy without making excuses in the name of national sovereignty. These countries have to understand that the prevalence of authoritarianism may have a contagious effect in the hemisphere and can promote more and more pro-Chavez leaders in the region. The clearest examples are, beside the countries of the Bolivarian alliance, the former Government of Manuel Zelaya in Honduras, a conservative who became a Bolivarian, and the current government of Cristina Kirchner in Argentina. Almost 30 years ago, Argentina rejected authoritarianism after horrible years of repression. Ms. Kirchner has elevated Chavez to the level of a statesman and a hero. What is worse she has replicated a number of Chavez's practices including the nationalization of private companies, bullying of the opposition and the private sector, control and censorship of the media. In addition Kirchner has created a constant discourse of hostility, and has instigated a suspicious project of constitutional reform.

The U.S needs to exercise leadership among countries in the Hemisphere but making sure that the Democratic Charter signed by members of the Organization of American States (OAS) is implemented. The U.S must exercise its influence to take democratic leadership in the region or allow another key country to do so. It would be ideal if Brazil could be persuaded to take such leadership as the country is a growing democracy and economic power. I would add that the struggle for democracy in our hemisphere should not be merely based on moral principles. The struggle for democracy needs to be understood as a major strategic tool of national security. Democracy promotion creates a culture of peace and tolerance. A real democracy includes substantive components that reject elements such as alliances with rogue states. As Venezuela continues to ally itself with Iran, Belarus, Russia and China, the security threat on the United States aggravates. Chavez has brought his Bolivarian allies in the hemisphere including Presidents Rafael Correa from Ecuador, Evo Morales from Bolivia and Daniel Ortega from Nicaragua into similar alliances with Iran. If Iran turns nuclear, it is likely that missiles will be posted on Venezuelan soil creating a major threat to our security.

Chavez has built an illiberal democracy that includes regular elections but nothing else: no rule of law, no reasonable dialogue between the factions, no free press and abundant violence and intimidation. Chavez, nonetheless, rules because he continues to be elected. This is the card he holds to maintain his legitimacy. This is why Western Hemisphere countries have accepted Venezuela as a democracy, as have the Organization of American States (OAS) and Mercosur (The South American Common Market). In both organizations democracy is a pre-condition to become a member. However, Venezuela does not seem to fall under the category of non-democratic countries because Chavez elections are held and Chavez has been "democratically elected". If Chavez continues in power, he will consolidate his regime to the point where it will survive his death. Moreover, both China and Russia have major interests in perpetuating the Chavez government for a number of reasons including an ability to counteract U.S. influence in the hemisphere. The United States cannot treat the Venezuelan case as it has treated the Syrian case. Our national security is at stake.

U.S. policy should be as determined and aggressive as possible with the purpose of restoring genuine democracy to Venezuela and the hemisphere. The morning after the election will be the real test for the region and for the United States.