What were these 1,000 civilians if not hostages or human shields, as has long been alleged by Azov's critics?

I see Beaumont also uses the "they use to have some nazis but now they're all good" bit:

'The capture of Mariupol loomed large in the Kremlin’s imagination for propaganda purposes too: as the home base of the Azov brigade, which at its 2014 inception, when the war in Donbas began, included far-right volunteers, some with neo-Nazi affiliations. (In recent years the brigade has been fully integrated into the Ukrainian military).'

Rather a big assumption that 'full integration' into the Ukrainian military meant they stopped being nazis, as opposed to the likely opposite that the Ukraine military was futher nazified by the inclusion of these psycho mercenaries. Didn't they adopt the Bandera slogan 'slava ukraini' shortly after? The one we hear at pro-ukraine protests, U2's Kiev performance and even f*ing Eurovision.

Also the nerve of Beaumont to compare this to the siege of Stalingrad is quite breathtaking:

'Inverting history, the steelworks has become to Mariupol what the factory district was for Stalingrad’s Russian defenders, even as the Kremlin claimed prematurely, on several occasions, to have taken it.

But unlike Stalingrad, which could be resupplied across the Volga river, the Ukrainian defenders of Mariupol have been cut off from resupply by the surrounding Russian forces and also by their naval blockade of the Black and Azov seas.'

Yes Beaumont, you inverted history there, but not in the way you think you did!

jeers,
I