Aragorn Storm Miller offers a bold and critical international reappraisal of US-Venezuelan relations during the Cold War. In addition to being stylistically enjoyable and thorough in research, this study has deep implications as a “referendum on the Latin American Cold War” (ix). Miller closely examines the 1950s and 1960s to reassess the simplistic notion that US policy was a dismal failure, and demonstrates that maintaining some elements of representative government and popular support was more heavily prioritized in US policy toward Venezuela. Miller argues convincingly that due to Venezuela's perceived importance to hemispheric stability, the United States sought and found a balance between stopping left-wing revolution and supporting democratic development. Most gratifying is Miller's attention to both US and Venezuelan motives, including the willingness of Venezuelan voters to sacrifice in the interest of democratic development.

Drawing on archives from the Dominican Republic and across the United States, as well as published primary source collections, Miller successfully challenges the prevailing historiography and the general inattention to Venezuela's role as a “hinge between the United States and its antagonists in the hemisphere and beyond” (xv). The first chapter summarizes the changes of the years 1956–1959, following both Venezuelan politics and the changing approaches of US policy. Washington understood the need for shifts in policy and pushed back against right-wing dictatorships as well as against communists.

Chapter 2 addresses the years 1959–1961 as a turning point in both Venezuela and the circum-Caribbean, exploring the effects of such events as Fidel Castro's rise to power and the end of the Trujillo dictatorship in the Dominican Republic. Chapter 3 then discusses Latin American democratization and John F. Kennedy's relationship with Venezuela from 1960–1963: the rise of the Revolutionary Leftist Movement posed a challenge to President Rómulo Betancourt, who worked with the United States to suppress these far-left challenges while preserving elements of democratic government. The decline of the far right, Miller shows, ushered in new debates about the political future of Venezuela. Betancourt and Kennedy were instrumental in building successful dialogue out of the contentious middle ground in order to avoid “the iron grip of despotism as well as the excesses of communist revolution” (104).

As with other policies, Lyndon Johnson sought to uphold Kennedy's approach to the US relationship with Venezuela, and President Raúl Leoni largely sought to maintain Betancourt's path in Venezuela. Chapters 4 and show how important Venezuela was to US policy and the goals of the OAS through the mid 1960s. Fears of Castro's influence challenged the democratic-friendly policy, but OAS cooperation in isolating Cuba, combined with general Soviet disinterest, helped Johnson to push forward with support for the Alliance for Progress and a US-friendly Venezuela. Miller shows especially well in these chapters how Venezuela remained, for many policy makers, central to US Cold War strategy. Venezuela's government, too, fought to maintain popularity as well as control by use of civic action programs and military nation-building initiatives.

Finally, Chapter 6 traces the renewed US counterinsurgency push of the late 1960s and the ending of the extreme-left guerrilla insurgency in Venezuela. The year 1968 was, Miller argues, a “time of great triumph for the US-Venezuelan partnership over political extremism,” in large part because of the cooperative relationship between Presidents Johnson and Leoni (210).

Miller's volume interweaves archival research, newspaper articles, and other public sources to provide both a compelling analysis and a readable narrative. A truly international, and often transnational, work, Miller's book offers a much-needed re-examination of US-Venezuelan relations, with focused consideration on the inter-American influences and implications. With careful attention to the Venezuelan and Latin American perspectives, Miller demonstrates throughout this work the centrality of Venezuela in US efforts to stem the impact of the Cuban Revolution in the hemisphere. Miller does not overstate his case, but addresses the many mitigating factors affecting the changes in Venezuela—including even such subtleties as the passage of time itself.