KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Ukrainian drones struck a large military depot in a town deep inside Russia overnight, causing a huge blaze and prompting the evacuation of some local residents, a Ukrainian official and Russian news reports said Wednesday.

Meanwhile, a senior U.S. diplomat said that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s recently announced — but still confidential — plan for winning the war “can work” and help end the conflict that is now in its third year.

Ukraine claimed the strike destroyed Russian military warehouses in Toropets, a town in Russia’s Tver region about 380 kilometers (240 miles) northwest of Moscow and about 500 kilometers (300 miles) from the border with Ukraine.

The attack was carried out by Ukraine’s Security Service, along with Ukraine’s Intelligence and Special Operations Forces, a Kyiv security official told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the operation.

According to the official, the depot housed Iskander and Tochka-U missiles, as well as glide bombs and artillery shells. He said the facility caught fire in the strike and was burning across an area 6 kilometers (4 miles) wide.

Russian state news agency RIA Novosti quoted regional authorities as saying air defense systems were working to repel a “massive drone attack” on Toropets, which has a population of around 11,000. The agency also reported a fire and the evacuation of some local residents.

There was no immediate information about whether the strikes had caused any casualties.

Successful Ukrainian strikes on targets deep inside Russia have become more common as the war has progressed and Kyiv developed its drone technology.

Zelenskyy is also seeking the approval from Western nations for Ukraine to use the sophisticated weapons they are providing to hit targets inside Russia. Some Western leaders have balked at that possibility, fearing they could be dragged into the conflict.

Ukraine’s targeting of Russian military equipment, ammunition and infrastructure deep inside Russia, as well as making Russian civilians feel some of the consequences of the war that is being fought largely inside Ukraine, is part of Kyiv’s strategy.

The swift push by Ukrainian forces into Russia’s Kursk border region last month fits into that plan, which apparently seeks to compel Russian President Vladimir Putin to back down.

Putin, however, has shown no signs of backing down, and has been trying to grind down Ukraine’s resolve through attritional warfare and also sap the West’s support for Kyiv by drawing out the conflict. That has come at a price, however, as the U.K. Defense Ministry estimates that the war has likely killed and wounded more than 600,000 Russian troops.

On Tuesday, Putin ordered the country’s military to increase its number of troops by 180,000 to a total of 1.5 million by Dec. 1.

Zelenskyy last month said his plan to victory includes not only battlefield goals but also diplomatic and economic wins. The plan has been kept under wraps but the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, said during a news conference Tuesday that Washington officials have seen it.

“We think it lays out a strategy and a plan that can work,” she said, adding that the United States will bring it up with other world leaders at the U.N. General Assembly in New York next week. She did not comment on what the plan contains.

___

Follow AP’s coverage of the war in Ukraine at https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine

At least nine people were killed and thousands of others were injured when handheld pagers exploded across Lebanon on Tuesday in an apparent targeting of Hezbollah members, according to Hezbollah officials.

Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency initially reported that “the handheld pagers system was detonated using advanced technology, and dozens of injuries were reported” in Beirut’s southern suburbs and other areas. Lebanon’s health minister later said at least nine people were killed and 2,750 wounded — 200 of them critically.

Among those injured when the pagers exploded included Iran’s ambassador in Lebanon, Iranian state media reported.

A security source in Lebanon told Reuters that the pagers were carried by members of Hezbollah. A Hezbollah official, speaking to the outlet on condition of anonymity, described the incident as a detonation that was the “biggest security breach” during the nearly year-long war with Israel. It wasn’t immediately clear who was responsible for the attack. While Hezbollah blamed Israel, the Israeli government has not commented.

HEZBOLLAH’S NEIGHBORS: ISRAELI BORDER COMMUNITY UNDER CONSTANT ATTACK FROM TERROR GROUP

Photos and videos from Beirut’s southern suburbs circulating on social media and in local media showed people lying on the pavement with wounds on their hands or near their pants pockets.

“Several hundred” people were wounded in all in different parts of Lebanon when the incident happened, The Associated Press cited a Hezbollah official as saying.

In a statement obtained by Reuters, Hezbollah confirmed that the blasts killed at least two of its fighters and a girl. 

The girl was the 9-year-old daughter of a Hezbollah fighter who was inside her parents’ home when the pagers exploded, the Times of Israel reported.

ISRAEL STRUCK BY LONG-RANGE MISSILE FROM YEMEN, 40 PROJECTILES FROM LEBANON IN EARLY MORNING ATTACKS

Hezbollah said the cause of the simultaneous explosions was under investigation.

Hezbollah members recently began using the pagers that exploded after the group’s leader ordered them to stop using cell phones over concern that Israeli intelligence could track the devices.

People gather outside the American University hospital after the arrival of several men who were wounded by exploded handheld pagers in Beirut, Lebanon, Tuesday. (AP Photo/Bassam Masri)

Hezbollah is an Islamic terrorist organization that has long had the backing of Iran.

UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert said Tuesday that she deplores the attack across Lebanon that left at least nine dead, including children, and thousands injured.

In accordance with international humanitarian law, she reminded all concerned actors that civilians are not targets and must be protected at all times.

“Even one civilian casualty is one too many,” a statement from her office read. “The developments today mark an extremely concerning escalation in what is an already unacceptably volatile context. While the full impact of the attack is still unfolding, Hennis-Plasschaert urges all concerned actors to refrain from any further action, or bellicose rhetoric, which could trigger a wider conflagration that nobody can afford.

“The Special Coordinator underlines the urgency of restoring calm and calls on all concerned actors to prioritize stability as paramount. Too much is at stake to do anything less,” the statement added.

U.S. State Department spokesman Matt Miller denied that the U.S. was involved or had any knowledge of the incident prior to the explosions.

“I can tell you that the U.S. was not involved in it. The U.S. was not aware of this incident in advance,” Miller told reporters, adding that the U.S. is gathering information on the incident. 

Police officers inspect a car after a hand-held pager exploded inside the vehicle in Beirut, Lebanon, on Tuesday. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters Tuesday that the U.S. was not involved in the attack. She also said the White House was not aware of the operation or the incident.

Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder also held a weekly press briefing Tuesday and echoed Jean-Pierre’s comments, saying there was no U.S. involvement, to his knowledge.

The incident comes at a time of heightened tensions between Lebanon and Israel. The Lebanese militant group Hezbollah and Israeli forces have been clashing near-daily for more than 11 months against the backdrop of war between Israel and Hezbollah ally Hamas in Gaza.

This is a developing news story; check back for updates.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A new education law in South Africa is dividing lawmakers and sparking angry emotions in a country with a complex racial and linguistic history.

Last Friday, President Cyril Ramaphosa signed the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) bill into law but suspended the implementation of two hotly contested sections for at least three months for further consultations among opposing government factions.

Authorities insist that the law will make education more equitable. Stark economic inequalities in South Africa have contributed to lower literacy and post-school opportunities for the country’s Black majority. By 2022, even though 34.7 percent of Black teenagers had completed secondary school – up from 9.4 percent in 1996 – only 9.3 percent of Black people had a tertiary education. By comparison, 39.8 percent of the white population had a tertiary education.

“The law that we are signing today further opens the doors of learning. It lays a firm foundation for learning from an early age … It will ensure young children are better prepared for formal schooling,” Ramaphosa said during the signing event in Pretoria.

But critics of the law, mainly from the Afrikaans-speaking community, argue that clauses strengthening the government’s oversight over school language and admission policies would threaten mother-tongue education.

Here’s what to know about BELA and why some groups disagree with parts of the law:

What’s BELA and why is it controversial?

The new amendment modifies older school laws in the country: the South African Schools Act of 1996 and the Employment of Educators Act of 1998.

It includes new provisions, such as a ban on corporal punishment for children, jail terms for parents who fail to send their children to school, compulsory grade levels for children starting school, and increased scrutiny for homeschooling.

However, Sections 4 and 5, which regulate languages of instruction in school, and school admission policies, are causing upheaval among Afrikaans-speaking minority groups.

The clauses allow schools to develop and choose their languages of instruction out of South Africa’s 11 official languages, as well as their admissions policy. However, it also gives the National Department of Basic Education the final authority, allowing it to override any decisions. Until now, school boards had the highest authority on languages and admissions.

Authorities in the past have cited how some schools exclude children, especially from Black communities, based on their inability to speak Afrikaans as one reason for the policy update.

Following South Africa’s break from apartheid, Black parents were allowed to send their children to better-funded, previously white-only schools where Afrikaans was often the main instruction language.

Some Black parents, however, claimed their wards were denied placements because they did not speak Afrikaans. Accusations of racism in school placements continue to be an issue: in January 2023, scores of Black parents protested in front of the Laerskool Danie Malan, a school in Pretoria that largely uses Afrikaans and Setswana (another official African language), claiming their children were denied for “racist” reasons. However, the school authorities rejected the claim, and other Black parents confirmed to local media that their children attended the institution.

Why are some Afrikaans speakers upset over BELA?

Some Afrikaans speakers say the new law threatens their language and, by extension, their culture and identity. Afrikaans-speaking schools also accuse the authorities of pressuring them to instruct in English.

Afrikaans is a mixture of Dutch vernacular, German and native Khoisan languages, which developed in the 18th century. It is predominantly spoken in South Africa by about 13 percent of the 100 million population. They include people from the multiracial “coloured” community (50 percent) and white descendants of Dutch settlers (40 percent).

Some Black people (9 percent) and South African Indians (1 percent) also speak Afrikaans, particularly those who lived through apartheid South Africa, when the language was more widely used in business and schools. It is more commonly spoken in the Northern and Western Cape provinces.

Of a total of 23,719 public schools, 2,484 — more than 10 percent — use Afrikaans as their sole or second language of instruction, while the vast majority teach in English. Some Afrikaans speakers argue that giving locally elected officials more power to determine a school’s language will politicise the matter and could lead to fewer schools teaching in Afrikaans. Many also fault the section of the law that allows government officials to override admissions policy.

“There is only a government of national disunity,” one commenter posted on the website of the South African newspaper Daily Maverick on Friday about the divisions within the coalition Government of National Unity (GNU) that have emerged amid the language row.

“By opting to destroy Afrikaans and Afrikaans schools and universities, the ANC and Cyril are making a mockery of unity. This is what happens if the provincial department can unilaterally control the admission of learners and language mediums at schools,” the commenter said, referring to Ramaphosa and his party, the African National Congress (ANC).

Last week, Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen, who is the leader of the Democratic Alliance (DA), the second-largest party in the GNU, condemned the government’s decision to move ahead with the bill despite reservations among the ANC’s coalition partners.

The politician, who is Afrikaner, also threatened a tit-for-tat response if the law is eventually signed as is.

“The DA will have to consider all of our options on the way forward … Any leader who tries to ride roughshod over their partners will pay the price – because a time will come when the shoe is on the other foot, and they will need the understanding of those same partners in turn,” he said.

Education Minister Siviwe Garube, a Black member of the DA, did not attend the signing ceremony in Pretoria in a show of defiance.

What is the history of school language controversies in South Africa?

Afrikaans is historically emotive in South Africa, dating back to British colonial rule.

To some, Afrikaans represents self-determination, but to many more, particularly in the Black community, it evokes memories of the brutal days of segregation and apartheid.

Originally, Afrikaans was regarded as an unsophisticated version of Standard Dutch. It was called “kitchen Dutch”, referencing the enslaved Cape populations who spoke it in the kitchen and to their settler masters. In the late 1800s, after the first and second Boer wars that saw Dutch settlers or “Boers” fight their British colonists and win independence, Afrikaans came to be regarded as a language of freedom for the white population. In 1925, it was adopted as an official language.

During the apartheid years, however, Afrikaans became synonymous with oppression for the majority Black population which faced the worst forms of subjugation under the system. Some scholars note (PDF) that the apartheid government uprooted Black families from urban areas to destitute self-governed “Bantustans” (homelands) partly based on their inability to speak the two official languages at the time, Afrikaans and English.

Most Black schools in South Africa at the time taught in English, as it was regarded as the language for Black emancipation. However, the government attempted to impose both English and Afrikaans as compulsory medium languages in schools starting from 1961.

That move ignited a series of student protests in June 1976 in the majority-Black community of Soweto, where the policy was meant to be implemented first. Between 176 and 700 people were killed when apartheid security forces used deadly force on schoolchildren in what is now known as the Soweto Uprising.

Apartheid authorities rescinded the language policy in July 1976. When Black schools were allowed to choose their medium of education, more than 90 percent opted for English. None chose the other African languages, such as Xhosa or Zulu, which the apartheid government had also pushed: it was seen as a measure to promote tribalism and divide the Black community. In addition to those, the country’s other official languages are Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, Siswati, Tshivenda, Xitsonga and Ndebele.

What’s next?

Authorities say the different arms of government will debate Sections 4 and 5 for the next three months. However, barring a resolution, the law will fully be implemented as is, President Ramaphosa said.

Meanwhile, Afrikaner rights groups such as the AfriForum, have declared they will contest the decision in court. The group has been described as having “racist” leanings, although it denies this.

“Afrikaans has already been eroded in the country’s public universities in a similar way,” Alana Bailey, AfriForum’s cultural affairs head, said in a statement last week.

“The shrinking number of schools that still use Afrikaans as a language of instruction now is the next target. AfriForum is therefore preparing for both national and international legal action to oppose this,” she added.