Governments that suspended flights or warned citizens against travelling cite a combination of security concerns, institutional breakdown, and unpredictable diplomatic tensions.

Since early September, the U.S. government has been carrying out airstrikes on vessels it claims are drug-running boats from Venezuela and other Latin American countries, actions that Democrats, legal scholars and human rights groups have criticised as extrajudicial killings.

On Thursday, November 27, Trump again warned that he is prepared to expand those strikes to targets on land.

"The land is easier, but that's going to start very soon," Trump told reporters.

Maduro also accused the U.S. in a televised address in October of openly authorising CIA operations to topple his government, calling the move “unprecedented” in modern history.

“The U.S.  government  has decided to send the CIA to Venezuela,” Maduro said in the televised address reported by Viory. “They want to frighten, divide, and demoralise our people. But our people are clear, united, with millions of eyes and ears. We will defeat this conspiracy again.”

A relationship built on confrontation

Tensions between Trump and Maduro date back to 2017, when the White House imposed sweeping sanctions on Venezuelan officials, state-run oil company PDVSA, and the government’s financial networks in a bid to force democratic reforms.

The sanctions accelerated Venezuela’s economic collapse, restricting its access to global capital markets and worsening shortages of fuel, medicine and basic goods.

By early 2019, the Trump administration recognised opposition leader Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s legitimate interim president, triggering a rupture in diplomatic relations. Caracas expelled U.S. diplomats and accused Washington of orchestrating a coup.

As the political crisis intensified, Venezuela’s aviation system deteriorated further, prompting the U.S. decision to halt all flights that year.

Despite a brief easing of sanctions under President Joe Biden in 2023–24, Washington reinstated many restrictions after disagreements over electoral guarantees.

By the time Trump re-emerged as a central political figure in 2025, the relationship had once again become combustible.

Airlines began withdrawing voluntarily years before official bans, citing unpaid debts, unsafe airport conditions, and rising crime around transit hubs. Carriers from Colombia, Brazil, and several European countries reduced their routes long before the current wave of political restrictions.

Today’s bans come against a backdrop of continued concerns over Venezuela’s regulatory oversight, reports of airport corruption, and frequent nationwide blackouts that disrupt aviation systems. Several governments warn that deteriorating security and infrastructure make travel too risky for citizens or airline crews.

Amid rising global economic and humanitarian pressures, including climate shocks, food security threats, and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the organisation says the new plan aims to reach those still left behind: vulnerable children, their families, and communities in fragile circumstances.

In practical terms, the strategy promises to ramp up programmes that will protect children from harm and improve their education.

“Our core actions will protect children from harm, strengthen their education, improve their health and nutrition, help families build resilience and support communities to adapt to climate and economic challenges,” emphasised World Vision Rwanda’s National Director, Pauline Okumu.

Rwanda has made remarkable social and economic progress over the past decades, guided by national vision plans such as Vision 2050 . But the country still faces structural challenges of poverty, limited rural access to services, inequality, and vulnerability to climate and economic shocks.

In this context, World Vision Rwanda’s strategy could act as a powerful supplement to government efforts, targeting the most vulnerable children who risk being left behind otherwise.

Since beginning long-term, child-focused programmes in the early 2000s, World Vision Rwanda has intervened through water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), education, child protection, health, nutrition and livelihoods programmes by delivering clean water access to more than 1 million people between 2018 and 2023, and enabling over 678,500 individuals to access livelihood support and financial inclusion services.

The underlying story involves tradition, changing attitudes, public health , and activist pressure.

Historically, dog meat has been consumed in certain cultures as a source of protein, in ritual contexts, or out of necessity. Today, it persists in Cambodia, China, parts of Northeastern India, Indonesia, Ghana, Laos, Nigeria, South Korea, Switzerland, and Vietnam.

China is often cited as the largest consumer. Although precise numbers are elusive, some estimates place dog slaughter in the tens of millions annually.

In response to global outrage and local activism, cities such as Shenzhen and Zhuhai banned dog (and cat) meat trading in 2020, and China’s Ministry of Agriculture has since reclassified dogs as companion animals rather than livestock .

Vietnam is another notable example—with millions of dogs reportedly processed annually for consumption, often under conditions that raise serious animal welfare and safety concerns.

In South Korea, a long-standing cultural practice is in the process of fading. In January 2024, the Korean National Assembly unanimously passed legislation to ban dog meat production and sale by 2027, giving farmers and traders a transition window.

In Indonesia, although Muslim dietary laws generally regard dog meat as forbidden (haram), it remains in use among certain ethnic groups and regions. Welfare groups estimate that over 1 million dogs per year may be slaughtered in Indonesia for consumption. On Bali alone, 60,000 to 70,000 dogs are reportedly killed annually.

Ghana is among the African nations where dog meat consumption has cultural and ritual significance. Ethnic groups such as the Tallensi, Akyims, Kokis, and Yaakuma have long histories of consuming dog meat.

However, the global momentum appears to be shifting. International pressure, rising awareness of animal welfare, health risks (such as parasites, bacterial infections, and contamination), and changing generational attitudes are all contributing to a decline in the practice.

According to The World in Maps and state wildlife regulations, only a few states permit the ownership of kangaroos without a permit. These include Wisconsin, West Virginia, and South Carolina. In these states, exotic animal restrictions are looser, though owners must still comply with animal welfare laws.

Some states allow kangaroo ownership with permits, usually issued through state wildlife or agriculture departments. These include Texas , Washington, Idaho, Maine, and New Hampshire. Permits typically require proof of proper enclosures, veterinary care, and safety measures.

The majority of U.S. states—including California, New York, Florida, Illinois, and Ohio— ban private kangaroo ownership outright. Wildlife agencies cite reasons such as animal welfare, public safety, and ecological risks.

For example, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife prohibits kangaroos and wallabies under its restricted species laws, classifying them as exotic and potentially dangerous animals.

Experts say kangaroos are not domesticated animals and require specialised care. The Humane Society of the United States warns that exotic pets like kangaroos can face health issues in captivity and pose risks to humans due to their powerful legs and unpredictable behaviour.

Kangaroos are also protected under international wildlife trade agreements, including CITES, which regulates the import of exotic species.