Mali’s Prime Minister Choguel Maiga has been fired, state television ORTM said on Wednesday of the civilian who criticized the ruling junta’s failure to organize elections within a promised 24-month transition back to democracy.

The military rulers, who seized power in successive coups in 2020 and 2021, had promised to hold elections in February but postponed the vote indefinitely for technical reasons.

Last week, Maiga said there had been no debate on the elections’ postponement within the government and that he found out about the junta’s decision from the media.

“It’s all happening in total secrecy, without the prime minister’s knowledge,” Maiga told reporters on Saturday.

His comments sparked tensions with the junta, forcing it to postpone a ministerial council meeting planned for Wednesday, a source close to Maiga told Reuters.

Maiga had fervently defended Mali’s junta as West African neighbors and international allies criticized its military cooperation with Russian mercenaries and repeated election delays.

Under the law, Maiga’s successor would have to form a new government in consultation with interim President Assimi Goïta.

Before being named prime minister in 2021, Maiga served as Mali’s commerce minister under former President Amadou Toumani Toure and as digital economy minister under former President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita.

Maiga was also the leader of the M5-RFP opposition coalition that spearheaded protests against Keita before his overthrow.

Investigators are trying to crack the mystery of how two undersea internet cables in the Baltic Sea were cut within hours of each other, with European officials saying they believe the disruption was an act of sabotage and US officials suggesting it was likely an accident.

The two cables – the BCS East-West connecting Lithuanian and Sweden and the C-Lion1 linking Finland with Germany – were suddenly disrupted on Sunday and Monday.

European leaders were quick to voice their suspicions. Germany’s Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said that “nobody believes that these cables were accidentally severed.”

The foreign ministers of Finland and Germany said in a joint statement that they were “deeply concerned” about the incident and raised the possibility that it was part of a “hybrid warfare,” specifically mentioning Russia in their statement.

Their assessment was not plucked out of thin air. Russia has been accused of waging a hybrid war against Europe after a string of suspicious incidents, arson attacks, explosions and other acts of sabotage across multiple European countries were traced back to Moscow.

And the disruption to the cables came just weeks after the US warned that Moscow was likely to target critical undersea infrastructure. This followed months of suspicious movements of Russian vessels in European waters and the significant beefing up of a dedicated Russian secretive marine unit tasked with surveying the seabed.

The Kremlin on Wednesday rejected the “laughable” suggestions that it was involved, saying it was “absurd to keep blaming Russia for anything without any grounds.”

Still, law enforcement agencies in both Sweden and Finland indicated they believe the damage deliberate.

The Swedish Prosecuting Administration said Tuesday it launched a preliminary investigation into a suspected sabotage. Then on Wednesday, the Finnish National Bureau of Investigation announced it was opening a criminal investigation into the suspected crimes of aggravated criminal mischief and aggravated interference with communications.

One vessel in particuar has sparked the interest of authorities and online sleuths.

The Chinese-flagged ship Yi Peng 3 was spotted in the area around the times the two cables were cut. The bulk carrier was sailing from the Russian port of Ust-Luga, where it docked for several days.

On Wednesday, the Danish Armed Forces said they were present in the area near Yi Peng 3, but did not say whether they pursued the vessel.

Asked about the vessel during a press briefing on Wednesday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said he was “not aware of the situation.”

He said China “has always fully fulfilled its flag state obligations and requires Chinese ships to strictly abide by relevant laws and regulations.”

“We also attach great importance to protecting the safety of undersea infrastructure and work with the international community to actively promote the construction and protection of submarine cables and other global information infrastructure,” he said.

The United States has vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that called for an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, on the grounds it would not have secured the release of hostages.

“We made clear throughout negotiations we could not support an unconditional ceasefire that failed to release the hostages. Because, as this council has previously called for, a durable end to the war must come with the release of the hostages,” Deputy US Ambassador Robert Wood said following the veto Wednesday.

“These two urgent goals are inextricably linked. This resolution abandoned that necessity, and for that reason, the United States could not support it,” Wood added.

Seven American citizens are still being held in Gaza. “We will not forget them,” he said.

The resolution put to the 15-member council by its 10 non-permanent members demanded an “immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire to be respected by all parties; and further reiterates its demand for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.”

However, US officials said the language was not strong enough as it did not condition the ceasefire on the release of the hostages.

Wood claimed that the authors of the resolution had declined to consider compromise language that could have led to its passage, noting also that it failed to “condemn Hamas for its October 7 terrorist attack.”

Only the US voted against the resolution, using its position as one of the five permanent members of the council to veto it.

The other four permanent members voted for it – including the UK, which has previously abstained from three other ceasefire resolutions shot down by the US.

Before the vote, Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon said approval of the resolution would have been a “betrayal.”

Veto ‘emboldens Israel’: Palestinian Authority

Palestinian officials condemned the veto. “There is no right to mass killing of civilians. There is no right to starve an entire civilian population. There is no right to forcibly displace a people. And there is no right to annexation. This is what Israel is doing in Gaza,” said Majed Bamya, deputy ambassador to the Palestine mission to the UN.

The Palestinian Authority presidency said the US move “emboldens Israel to continue its crimes against innocent civilians in Palestine and Lebanon,” according to the official Palestinian news agency WAFA.

The council’s 10 elected members (E10) that sponsored the draft resolution were “deeply disappointed” it was not adopted, according to Guyana Ambassador Carolyn Allison Rodrigues-Birkett. Guyana is one of the E10.

Permanent member France also expressed disappointment. “There is an obvious urgency to implement an immediate and unconditional ceasefire. This is the only way to guarantee the protection of all civilians and the massive and unhindered delivery of emergency aid,” France’s UN representative Nicolas de Riviere said.

The UK’s Ambassador Barbara Woodward described its decision to back the resolution as “an expression of our determination to end this war, stop the suffering in Gaza and secure the immediate release of the hostages.”

In June, the Security Council approved a US-backed ceasefire plan to end the war. Fourteen of the 15 members voted in favor, with only Russia abstaining – the first time the UNSC had endorsed such a plan.

However, following the vote, Israel vowed to persist with its military operation, saying it would not engage in “meaningless” negotiations with Hamas.

The Australian government is threatening multimillion dollar fines for social media companies that breach a proposed ban on children under 16 from using their service.

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland introduced an amendment to the Online Safety Act in parliament on Thursday, which the government has pitched as “world-leading social media reform.”

“The Albanese Government is introducing world leading legislation to establish 16 as the minimum age for access to social media,” Rowland said in a statement.

“This reform is about protecting young people and letting parents know we’ve got their backs,” she added.

The legislation includes financial penalties of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($32.5 million) for companies found not to have taken “reasonable steps to prevent age-restricted users having accounts.”

The ban is expected apply to social media services including TikTok, X, Instagram and Snapchat, though a list of banned services has not been released.

The legislation has bipartisan support and if passed would come into effect in one year.

“The legislation places the onus on social media platforms, not parents or children, to ensure protections are in place,” Rowland said. “Ultimately, this is about supporting a safer and healthier online environment for young Australians.”

The legislation follows several high-profile cases of children taking their own lives citing online bullying, and complaints from parents about the pressure their children face to be online.

Many parents and pro-ban campaigners have lauded the bill as a long overdue measure to impose accountability on tech companies for tools Australian children use online.

However, critics say the proposed ban is a blunt instrument that will reduce teens’ access to support networks and create greater risks for those who flout the ban.

Both sides agree about the risks of children spending too much time online, and the need for tech companies to do more to safeguard their products.

The Australia government’s also commissioned the UK consortium Age Check Certification Scheme to trial age verification technology, to aid efforts to keep children off social media platforms.

And it’s proposed a “digital duty of care” on providers to “keep users safe and help prevent online harms.” Similar agreements have been introduced elsewhere that allow users to complain and for authorities to take action.

Ukraine launched the British-French-made Storm Shadow missiles at targets inside Russia for the first time on Wednesday, according to a Russian military blog and Reuters, a day after Ukraine fired US-made ATACMS missiles into Russia.

Ukraine’s use of the UK-supplied missiles to hit Russian territory was confirmed to Reuters by an official on condition of anonymity. British media also reported the use of the cruise missile on Wednesday, citing sources.

When Umerov was asked if Ukraine used the Storm Shadow missiles to hit a target inside Russia, he replied, “we are using all the means to defend our country, so we’ll not go into detail. But we are just sending that we are capable and able to respond.”

Umerov added: “We’ll be defending and giving punches back… with all the means available.”

A Russian military blogger on Wednesday posted photos on Telegram of a Storm Shadow missile fragment, claiming that up to 12 of the missiles were fired on Russia’s Kursk region.

According to the Russian blog, the fragment was photographed in the Russian village of Marino, which is about 35 miles from the Ukrainian border. The fragment has engravings that say “Storm Shadow.”

BBC’s diplomatic correspondent Paul Adams wrote on Wednesday that “Ukraine has so far confined the use of Storm Shadow to the Kursk region, where Ukrainian troops continue to hold ground.” He noted reports were still murky, and the target is not known “but Storm Shadow is powerful enough to penetrate bunkers, with extreme accuracy.”

Ukraine used US missiles to hit ammo depot

Ukraine used eight long-range US missiles to successfully hit an ammunition depot deep inside Russia, according to two US defense officials.

The facility struck is in Bryansk, north of the Kursk region, where Ukraine continues to hold Russian territory sezied in a counteroffensive.

According to an initial assessment of the strike, the Ukrainian attack damaged the ammo depot, the officials said. One official added that the US had seen indications of secondary explosions, a common result of striking facilities housing large quantities of ammunition and weapons.

Russia fired two interceptors at the incoming missiles and may have intercepted a pair of the ATACMS, the officials said, but the attack was still successful in hitting its target.

The US assessment contradicts the Russia’s claim that the Ukrainian attack did not cause any casualties or damage.

The Russian Ministry of Defense said on Tuesday that Ukraine had fired six ATACMS missiles at the facility in Bryansk, claiming five of the missiles were shot down and the sixth was damaged. The Ministry said fragments of the missiles fell on the territory of the military facility, causing a fire that was extinguished.

Ukraine has yet to confirm or deny the use of the long-range US missiles. On Tuesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said: “Ukraine has long-range capabilities. Ukraine has long-range drones of its own production. We now have a long ‘Neptune’ (Ukrainian cruise missiles) and not just one. And now we have ATACMS. And we will use all of this.”

It is a very specific and high-profile warning, so you would expect the information behind it to have been quite precise.

The US Embassy in Kyiv has not closed since it relocated during the opening months of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. But on Wednesday, it announced a one-day closure, citing “specific information of a potential significant air attack.” Kyiv endures air attacks on an almost nightly basis – but the US step suggested a fear of being potentially targeted.

The Greek, Italian, and Spanish embassies followed suit, causing the Ukrainian foreign ministry to plead that its allies behave on the 1001st day of the war, as they had done on the previous thousand days, and not let their anxieties overcome them. Ukrainian defense officials even derided a fake warning circulated widely on Telegram claiming a massive Russian air attack, as being crude Russian-produced misinformation.

“[Moscow] have one instrument, which is to scare. This have always been a classic element of Russian politics. It’s blackmail and panic they want to create. I would like our partners to be more careful as to the information coming from Russia,” he said.

Residents in Kyiv struggled to reconcile the specific nature of the US warnings, with the quotidian daily threat they face. On Wednesday morning alone, there was a 45-minute air raid alert, and then another that lasted two and a half hours.

In the central Maidan Square, where a sea of flags are each marked with the name of a dead soldier, Anya planted one in memory of her father. She is used to air raids in her hometown of Krivyh Rih, but Wednesday felt different.

“I will be honest, we went down to the basement during every air raid siren today,” she said. “It was really scary indeed.”

Every flag in the square is a story of this war’s trauma and turmoil. Her father died in late October after five months in a coma from frontline injuries, she said. “I want peace very much, but want things to be as they used to be — without Russia. I just want all this to be over.”

Threats and talk of peace are deeply personal across Ukraine, yet the geopolitical risk is growing too. The US Embassy felt compelled to clarify its closure was not linked to the nuanced changes in Russia’s nuclear doctrine, loudly detailed by the Kremlin on Tuesday, insisting it stemmed from the fear of drone or missile attack.

Yet both statements showed how far this war is escalating: a US diplomatic mission saying it feared a direct Russian attack, then specifying at least this would not be nuclear.

It would be a grave and perhaps foolhardy move by the Kremlin to directly attack American government assets in Ukraine now. It would necessitate a severe American response that could trigger a wider war between NATO and Russia. Above all, it would likely tie the hands of US President-elect Donald Trump, who seems keen on stopping “the killing” and striking a deal with Russia. Putin would be wise to hold off a few months.

It is important to remember much of Russia’s domestic narrative insists Moscow is already in a wider war against the US and NATO. That is an inaccurate reflection of the proxy fight, in which NATO is arming Ukraine to wage in its own defense. But it is a story told by the Kremlin to Russians, intended to excuse their appalling performance over a thousand days, fighting a war that was only meant to last a few weeks.

While Russia is the aggressor, strategically it is difficult to see how Moscow can continue to endure the overt Western escalation against its territory without trying to assert some sort of deterrence again. They are slowly finding all the red lines the Kremlin head seems to lay down evaporate in the heat.

Kyiv will likely remain on edge. Moscow might inflict damage on a civilian target where Westerners are known to congregate — a major hotel, or district in the capital. Putin is unlikely to view his slow success on the frontline — and the looming change in the White House — as marking a moment where the tide is turning against him. Rather, he may see the next two months as a test of his patience and resolve, with clear rewards ahead.