Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez yesterday showed off his new look — a shaved head due to the chemotherapy treatment he has been undergoing for an unspecified cancer. Reports say he nonetheless seemed in good spirits, “criticising the opposition, discussing Friedrich Nietzsche and recalling a comic he enjoyed reading as a child”.

There are more important thing to worry about, however, than Chavez’s appearance. Observers are looking for any signs of a policy shift in his autocratic regime before elections scheduled for next year, and also for hints about the succession should he die in office or retire due to ill health.

As has so often happened with Chavez, the signals have been mixed. Last week, celebrating his 57th birthday, he again promised to run for re-election, and joked that he could still be in power in 2031. But the following day he gave tantalising hints of a change of front, saying “We need to reflect and introduce changes in our discourse and in our actions” and promising greater respect for the private sector and the middle class.

Most of Latin America has seen a big swing to liberalisation in the past 20 years. Brazil, Argentina and Chile, which at different times have all been bywords for dictatorship, are now stable democracies with flourishing economies. But Venezuela under Chavez has moved the other way, concentrating power and marginalising opposition forces.

In particular, Chavez has always looked to Cuba as a model and professed great admiration for Fidel Castro (although unlike Cuba, Venezuela has retained at least the trappings of democracy). In turn, Chavez has become a cult figure in his own right among several far-left groups worldwide.

Last week, however, the Cuban example was offering a different lesson, as Chavez pointed with approval to the reforms and “process of self-criticism” undertaken by Raul Castro, who replaced his ailing brother three years ago.

Cuba’s national assembly has this week approved a package of reforms proposed by Raul Castro, including reducing the state’s role in the economy and encouraging private businesses. If Chavez is serious about going down the same road, it will be a significant break with the trenchantly socialist rhetoric of his past.

But the two countries are importantly different. The Castros have a party apparatus behind them, with reasonable prospects of a disciplined, orderly succession. Chavez’s regime is much more a one man band; if he goes, no one really knows what would happen.

Autocrats do sometimes mellow with age, so it is quite possible that Chavez, having been forcefully reminded of his mortality, will become a bit less obsessed with maintaining his own grip on power. But he may also think that if a change in direction is required that is all the more reason for him to stay in power to see it through and prevent the chaos of a power vacuum — or (from his point of view) worse, an opposition comeback.

Either way, the old-fashioned Chavez of red shirts, creeping autocracy and three-hour speeches looks to be on the way out. “Why do we have to always have to wear a red shirt?” he asked last week. Why indeed? But it remains to be seen whether Venezuelans will get more than cosmetic change.