Ukraine Won’t Get Leopard 2 or M1 Abrams Tanks: Does It Matter?

Conservative News DailyJanuary 22, 2023

Western Defense Leaders Resist the Call to Submit More NATO Tanks To Ukraine. Is it important? – The United States has announced its largest ever tranche of armored vehicle and other lethal assistance for Ukraine in the last few days. The U.S. and Germany were present at Friday’s meeting of the 50-nation Ukraine Defense Contact Group at Ramstein Airbase, Germany. refused to commit Ukraine will receive either the M1 Abrams Oder Leopard 2 tanks.

[embedded content]

(Click here to see Daniel L. Davis, the author of this article talking to LBC.

Even without the main battle tanksHowever, Ukraine received an impressive list of modern armored cars.

But will these high-tech tanks – if Ukraine eventually gets them – transform the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) into a modern force that can drive Russia Out later in the spring?

The chances aren’t as great as many believe.

Only time will tell, but Western supporters and Ukrainian leaders need to understand the scale of the challenge Zelensky’s troops face in trying to convert the sum total of all military gear into sufficient combat power necessary to drive Putin’s army back to Russia. As it has been since antiquity, wars are waged – and won or lost – by men, not the machines and tools of war.

What Ukraine has now and what it got

The U.S. has just announced a new package of equipment to Ukraine. It is significant.

It has the following features 59 U.S. Bradley Fighting Vehicles (or BFVs now, for a total of 110 vehicles). 90 Stryker armored combat vehicles, and 350 Humvees.

Since the invasion the U.S. has given Over 60,000 anti-armor/missiles were either transferred to Ukraine, along with 160 155mm, 72 105mm, and nearly 1.5 million artillery bullets of each caliber, 38 HIMARS rocket launchers and 300 M113 armored personnel carrier, 250 M1117 armored security vehicle, 500 MRAP armored trucks and 111 million rounds small arms ammunition. There are literally hundreds of weapons and tools of warfare.

This is a huge list, regardless of how you count it. Last month, Gen. Valery Zalazhny, commander of the Ukrainian Armed Forces was elected. told the Economist Zaluzhny will need 300 tanks, 500 armored personnel cars, and 500 howitzers. Though the Ramstein Defense Group didn’t promise the tanks Zaluzhny wanted, the sum total of Soviet-era tanks, personnel carriers, and artillery systems provided by all nations combined has reached a stunning number.

According to a Bloomberg accounting prior to Friday’s Ramstein meeting, Western and other nations have given Zelensky’s forces 410 Soviet-era tanks, 300 Soviet-era infantry fighting vehicles, 550 non-U.S. armored personnel carriers, about 500 non-U.S. MRAPs, 1,500 infantry wheeled vehicles (including 1,250 Humvees), more than 50 non-U.S. multiple rocket launchers, and almost 500 towed and self-propelled artillery systems. This equipment is on top of what Ukraine still owns.

Some sources claim that Ukraine had approximately 2,000 tanks Ukraine had the following: allegedly lost 320 tanks. Even if you assume that the West suffered twice the losses, Kyiv still maintains a range of around 1,700 tanks in its army. This belief that having some modern NATO tanks can make a big difference is not based upon a thorough understanding of modern combat.

M1 Abrams v. Soviet-era T-72

In Desert Storm, U.S. M1A1 Abrams tanks wiped out Saddam Hussein’s fleets of Soviet-made T-72s, and again the American Abrams-led invasion in 2003 revealed the T-72 was no match for U.S. tanks. The American tanks were truly a stout success. For example, during Desert Storm, the U.S. along with its coalition partners were defeated more than 3,000 Iraqi tanks. Saddam’s armored force, however, did not destroy even a single Abrams tank. It’s understandable, then, why anyone would want to have an Abrams or equivalent tank, especially when it has proven so effective against exactly the type of tanks Russia has.

It is difficult to understand why the Abrams were successful and the T-72s not so. The tank can only be as good and efficient as its operators, as well as the units it is used by. Eagle Troop 2 was my fighting force.^nd Squadron, 2^nd Armored Cavalry regiment at the Battle of 73 Easting. In which we destroyed scores of Soviet era tanks and other armored vehicle, but didn’t lose a Bradley Fighting Vehicle or tank on our side, As was the case throughout that war, there were two reasons.

First, U.S. crewmen were well-trained as individuals. My unit’s tank drivers, loaders and gunners were all highly trained individuals. We had spent a lot of time training in platoons and then at company level. Later we trained in squadron, then regimental levels. No one was more ready to fight than us.

Second, Iraq had done almost none of these things, as we found out later. Their crewmembers had minimal training, had rarely if ever, fired their main guns in training, did very little unit-level training, and their maintenance programs – far more important in tank operations than commonly understood – was virtually non-existent. The T-72 operators had poor training, while our side was well-trained.

Tank battles are won almost every time the side that fires correctly wins. Our training ensured that we fired the first shot in Desert Storm. However, even when the Iraqi gunners did get a shot off, it was often not on target. They were ultimately killed.

Man or machine?

This is a well-known truth. Even if the Iraqis were equipped with the same M1A1s or the same T72s Iraq was equipped with, they would still have won. It is the man using the tools of warfare that ultimately wins, not the tools. In every way, the Abrams is superior to any Soviet-era tanks. Even an M1 can be defeated if it isn’t properly trained and maintained.

The Abrams and Leopards are not ‘wonder weapons’ They will be able to achieve major victories on the Ukrainian battlefield. They are able to help. They will have a better fleet than the Ukrainian one. The nature of the war means that there have been very few tank-on tank engagements and, to my knowledge, almost no tank battles. But to demonstrate why adding M1s isn’t going to meaningfully alter battlefield dynamics, I will provide a realistic scenario:

Hypothetical Battle with Abrams and Leopards

Let’s say that last August when Ukrainian units were pressing in on Russian frontlines in the Kherson region, there was a section of the lines where Ukrainians had a mix of T-72, T-64s, and M-55s going against the Russian side that had T-72s, T-80s, and a few T-90s. It turned out that the battles in this area were dominated by artillery, rockets, infantry rushes, and few tank-on-tank encounters. But let’s now say that the Russian side had the same mix of tanks but the UAF had Abrams and Leopards. What would have been the difference?

The Western tanks are more precise than Soviet tanks, have better frontal armor protection and a longer range. However, the T-72s are still able to provide decent armor protection and have lethal cannons with shorter ranges. T-72 tank shots are still effective against NATO tanks. A flank or rear shot by a T-72, T-80, or T-90 can still disable or destroy an M1 Abrams tank – and can easily destroy every other tracked or wheeled vehicle in Ukraine’s inventory. Tanks are not able to fight alone and they often fall prey to anti-tank rockets. Even if Ukraine had M1 Abrams tanks to its opposite, it would have been a different story. KhersonThe battle would have remained the same.

What is the Next Step for Ukraine?

Zelensky’s troops already have a significant number of tanks equivalent to their opposition. The way they train, the unit-level capacity that they build, and the maintenance of their tanks will determine whether or not they win or lose battles.

MORE: Donald Trump Just Destroyed His 2024 Changes

MORE: The F-15EX Is No F-35

MORE: The One GOP Candidate Worse Than Donald Trump

Flatly stated, Zelensky’s war against Russia will not turn on whether or not he gets Abrams and Leopards.

A 1945 Contributing Editor Daniel L. Davis He is a Senior Fellow in Defense Priorities, and a former Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army. He has been deployed to combat zones four times. He is the author “The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America.” Follow him @DanielLDavis