Hi Sarajevo !

3.2.1. Refusal to negotiate so as to minimize the number of hostages

To justify the use of force to resolve the situation, the authorities later asserted that the terrorists had put forward technically impossible terms. However, it is evident from the investigation materials that the problems arose for the sole reason that no authorized persons or professional negotiators had been invited to the process.
I often wondered, do the Russians have professional negotiators for such law enforcement situations ?

They have in the past always employed their military assets, not their police. I understand the reasons and I have nothing against that scenario, but military forces are not normally trained for hostage negotiations. This was a strike team and I doubt negotiations were ever part of the original equation.

3.2.2. Use of a "special means" without estimation of its effect on human life and without necessary medical aid facilities

As has been said above, special services used a special agent “to neutralize terrorists” in the situation that made it impossible to provide immediate medical aid and control individual dosage each hostage received.
I agree, the government authorized the use of this 'special agent' without considering the after affects and what would be needed immediately for the victims. But again, they employed special operations forces who probably had no intention nor idea what the outcome would require. Their concern was the terrorists IMHO !

What do ya think ?

Regards, Stan