Reports from the Russian Defense Ministry indicate that wounded Ukrainian service members have begun to be moved from the Azovstal plant in Mariupol along a humanitarian corridor. An agreement enabling this withdrawal was reached on May 16, and quiet operations were established around the facility to ensure safe passage.
In a statement, the Russian Defense Ministry confirmed that negotiations with Ukrainian military personnel barricaded at the Azovstal metallurgical plant led to an arrangement for removing the injured. The relocated soldiers were transferred to a medical facility in Novoazovsk, in the Donetsk People’s Republic, where they are receiving care and undergoing evaluation.
The commander of the Vostok battalion of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Alexander Khodakovsky, commented on the process, noting that speed and safety were improved by the deployment of additional stretchers and logistical support. He described steps taken to accelerate the evacuation while maintaining medical oversight.
Earlier updates indicated that ten individuals exited Azovstal under a white flag and surrendered. Khodakovsky clarified that a group representing a larger contingent inside the basements was involved in the coordination, and that the initial move encompassed a broader set of personalities beyond the first evacuees.
According to the territorial defense headquarters, attention shifted to civilian evacuation as well. Between 8:00 and 16:00, 219 people, including 40 children, were moved from Mariupol to Bezymennoye and are now located at a designated relief point managed by the Ministry of Emergency Situations.
Earlier statements from the Donetsk authorities claimed that no civilians remained within the Azovstal facility, reinforcing the impression that the area had been cleared of noncombatants as military operations continued in the broader district.
How did the evacuation unfold?
With Mariupol controlled by Russian forces and the local allied authorities by mid-April, many Ukrainian soldiers and a portion of the civilian population sought shelter inside the industrial zones and in Azovstal’s basements. The plant is known to feature an extensive underground network. The decision to avoid a direct assault was publicly justified by commanders who argued that a storming of such a complex could yield significant casualties. President Vladimir Putin directed the forces to seal off the site to prevent a breakthrough, aiming to minimize harm to both sides. In early May, Russian Defense Ministry officials stated that the remaining Ukrainian units were contained along Azovstal’s perimeter.
In late April, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine warned that the possibility of resistance ending in a loss or collapse could influence ongoing negotiations with Moscow. He reiterated this stance in early May, linking the fate of those at Azovstal to the broader negotiating process.
During a meeting with United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres in Moscow on April 26, discussions included the evacuation of civilians from Azovstal with the involvement of the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross. The first civilian group left Azovstal on May 1, with about 100 people moving to Zaporozhye. By May 6, an additional group of 50 women, children, and elderly individuals had been evacuated, and from May 5 to May 7, the Russian Defense Ministry reported further evacuations consisting of 18 men, 22 women, and 11 children from the facility.
On May 13, Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Reintegration, Iryna Vereshchuk, stated that Kyiv was seeking to finalize an agreement detailing the processes for future evacuations from Azovstal. On May 14, Turkey signaled readiness to help by dispatching a ship to assist in evacuation, contingent on land transfers to the Berdyansk port and onward transport by sea to Istanbul. Ramzan Kadyrov, Chechnya’s leader, criticized this plan, warning against attempting to shield individuals who might be pursued for past actions. He also referenced statements by members of the Azov battalion that were cited to criticize perceived insults to Islamic values, arguing that such rhetoric should not influence humanitarian decisions.