140 - Getting Ukraine the Arms it Needs: II

Washington is reluctant to supply Ukraine with M1 Abrams tanks, the most powerful mechanized land fighting craft in the American arsenal. Officially, the Pentagon says (in more polite words) that the Abram tanks are too sophisticated for Ukraine to learn to operate quickly enough to make a big difference against the Russians. Moreover, the Abram tanks use jet fuel, not diesel, and maintaining a steady supply for the tanks would pose serious logistical problems. Bit what Washington is not saying is that the U.S. military worries about Abrams tanks falling into Russian hands, where they would be examined carefully. The possibility of reverse engineering could follow. The Pentagon prudently wants to keep the tank’s secrets to itself.

            The Abrams tank could be a game changer, if only Washington were prepared to ship and then supply the fuel, spare parts, and ammunition that these behemoths would require consistently to attack and overcome Russian resistance.   Each is a formidable 68-ton monster with lots of armor, a 120 mm cannon, three machine guns, and a computerized fire control system. Each tank is powered by a turbine engine producing 1500 horsepower. It is faster than the Challenger II and the Leopard II, speeding in battle at 45 mph on roads and 30 mph off road. Fully equipped, the tank now costs more than $9 million.  The Abrams has been battle tested in Afghanistan and Iraq; Saudi Arabia employed the tanks in Yemen.

            As I wrote Thursday (#139), confident that a deal had already been cut for Germany to send Leopard II tanks to Ukraine and to “license” the seamless transfer to Ukraine of Leopard II tanks now owned and based in Poland, Latvia, and other European countries, the Leopards are lighter and more maneuverable than the Abrams, and they operate using diesel, not jet, fuel.

President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine wants 300 Leopard tanks now, not tomorrow, and not much later after the Russians have attempted to breakout of the cities and towns where Ukrainian forces have contained them.  There are more than 2,000 Leopard tanks in Europe, and 100 more elsewhere in Canada.

            At this point in the Ukrainian war, the defenders desperately require powerful tanks (as well as the many dozen Bradley Armored Personnel Carriers and Stryker eight-wheeled armored fighting vehicles arriving from the U.S.) if they are to gain ground against Russia before Putin’s side has a chance to ramp up, re-supply its fighters, and train its reinforcements.

            In addition to the Bradleys and Strykers, and Britain’s fourteen Challenger II tanks, Britain is sending 600 Brimstone anti-tank missiles “to help Ukraine dominate the battlefield.” Denmark is supplying nineteen long-range howitzers and more armored personnel carriers. Estonia is giving both Western and Soviet-style artillery and ammunition, as well as anti-tank grenade launchers. Latvia and Lithuania are providing Stinger anti-aircraft defense systems, helicopters, and drones.  Poland is moving 70,000 ammunition shells and, once Germany approves, fourteen Leopard tanks. Sweden is giving a specialized artillery apparatus that functions as a long-range howitzer, armored vehicles, and anti-tank missiles. Finland is depositing cash to support the Ukrainian upgraded armaments.

            All of these articles of renewed assistance will doubtless strengthen the Ukrainian ability to repulse Russian attacks and incursion.  Some equipment, especially the wheeled, partially armored and weaponize personnel carriers, can halt the rush of Russian armored attacks. In the best of times, they can even forestall enemy tanks.  But tanks are the consummate attack weapon, especially in a war fought off-road in winter.

With formidable battle tanks and the other lighter near-tanks, Ukraine will be able to punch holes in the Russian defensive lines and advance incrementally. The new equipment is also designed to stop the Russian tanks, and thus to turn Russian attacks into defeats. If Ukraine is to succeed against Russia, the tanks are wholly necessary. 

Chancellor Olaf Scholz or Germany and President Biden both say that they are leery of supplying tanks to Ukraine because Putin will view such transfers as provocations.  But the West surely does not wish or intend to give Putin a veto over how, when, and where the West supports Zelensky?  It is long past time for Berlin and Washington to act in concert, authorize the deployment of Leopard IIs in Ukraine, and make it evident to the Russian war machine and Putin’s shadow supporters, like Turkey, that the West stands squarely behind Ukraine.

Scholz should be ready to appreciate, too, that supplying major weapons of war to Ukraine can provide the only viable, shortened, path to lasting peace in Ukraine.  Without heavy tanks, the war lingers, mayhem continues and even escalates. Whatever Scholz holds back from the Ukrainian war effort only widens the killing fields.

As the New York Times editorialized yesterday: nothing “Putin has concocted remotely validates the leveling of towns and cities, the murder, rape and pillaging, or the deliberate strikes against power and water supplies across Ukraine. Like the last great European war, this one is mostly one man’s madness.’

If the tanks don’t quickly arrive and we fail this test of partnership, do we stand idly by while Ukraine is shelled, bombarded, droned against, and its long-suffering population suffers even more? Surely the West can do better.