The federal government does not want to give Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine until the US delivers M1 Abrams. But does that even make sense? An overview.
After months of discussions, the delivery of Leopard main battle tanks to Ukraine is drawing near. According to media reports, Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) is now ready to do so – but only under certain conditions. According to the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” and the “Bild” newspaper, Scholz made it clear in a telephone call to US President Joe Biden that Germany could only deliver if the US in turn provided Ukraine with its own Abrams battle tanks.
But does this debate even make sense? Would giving up the M1 Abrams help Ukraine? An overview:
What is the M1 Abrams?
The M1 Abrams has been the regular US Main Battle Tank since 1980 and is the backbone of the US Armed Forces. Since then, the tank has been constantly modernized and has received various increases in combat value. Better armor, faster and quieter engines, and more firepower. The latest versions of the M1 Abrams are therefore among the most modern main battle tanks in the world. The current model is the M1A2, but the next counter-ration Main Battle Tank – the AbramsX – was unveiled back in 2022.
Who uses the battle tank?
Despite its performance, it is not used by many armies compared to the Leopard 2. In addition to the US armed forces, Australia, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Greece rely on the Abrams. Poland has also ordered hundreds of used tanks from the US.
Where has it proven itself?
US forces have used the M1A2 Abrams primarily in deserts or steppes in Afghanistan and Iraq. For precisely these external conditions, it is considered a reliable tank. But that wasn’t always the case: In the beginning, the drive caused massive problems because it attracted too much dirt on sandy ground and failed too often. The frequently occurring glitches were fixed by installing a filter.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the M1 Abrams?
The strengths of the M1 Abrams are its 120 mm Rheinmetall gun, its composite armor made of different materials, and its reliability: since 1980, the US Army has lost only 18 Abrams M1s, with half of them being taken out of service due to damage; the other nine were destroyed in the 1990 Gulf War, but without any US soldiers being killed. This is also due to various safety systems designed to protect the crew from exploding ammunition – a major problem in many Russian tanks.
A special feature of the M1 Abrams compared to other main battle tanks is its drive: It consists of a gas turbine, which can also burn petrol, diesel or kerosene. The turbine with 1,500 hp is considered powerful, reliable and battle-tested – but consumes significantly more fuel than, for example, the diesel engine of a Leopard 2. The high fuel consumption makes it difficult to supply the tank in battle, but its range of up to 500 kilometers is comparable to that of the leopard 2
Is the Abrams the right tank for Ukraine?
Not really. First of all, the logistics chains are too long and expensive. The USA would first have to ship the heavy tanks to Europe and training on the complex technology is expensive. But the problems wouldn’t stop there: the tank requires a lot of maintenance and spare parts are scarce in Europe. Western supporters of Ukraine would therefore have to set up complex maintenance and repair logistics. That too is long and expensive.
In principle, the Leopard 2 would be a logical addition to the defense of Ukraine. The Ukrainian army would certainly also take the Abrams because it is one of the most modern main battle tanks in the world, but also and because they know: Chancellor Scholz cannot maintain his Leopard blockade if the United States is now also supplying main battle tanks after the British. Sufficient free equipment would also be available from summer 2023 because the US armed forces will be retiring hundreds of older Abrams. Nevertheless, this is probably only the B solution if Germany does not move.
