Follow us on social

Amx-10_rc_nouvelles_couleurs_armee_de_terre_14_juillet_2021_2-scaled

How Western tanks could change Ukraine’s war effort

New armored fighting vehicles could help Kyiv retake territory, but they also increase the risk of nuclear escalation from Moscow.

Reporting | Europe

On Wednesday, France announced plans to send light tanks to Ukraine, marking the first time that a Western country has supplied Kyiv with armored combat vehicles. Not to be outdone, unnamed U.S. officials told the Washington Post that the United States intends to share some of its own infantry fighting vehicles, with one source saying that the first shipment could be publicized as soon as this week.

The new weapons could make a significant difference in the conflict, which has fallen into a grinding stalemate as Russia and Ukraine continue to dig into their positions along the frontlines. Kyiv has already seen some success in using armor to retake territory from Moscow, and American Bradley Fighting Vehicles could help bring those efforts to the next level, according to Lyle Goldstein of Defense Priorities.

“To the credit of the Ukrainian commanders, they have managed to create some interesting tactics here,” Goldstein said, noting that Kyiv has used simpler armored vehicles like MRAPs in a sort of “Blitzkrieg-light” whereby its soldiers penetrate well beyond the front lines and “create chaos in the rear of the Russian forces.” New tanks and combat vehicles could make this tactic more effective, potentially helping to break the stalemate in the east.

There are, of course, a couple of limits to this approach. First, as Goldstein notes, “traditional military theory would hold that this is really impossible without air cover,” and Ukrainian air power “remains extremely limited.” In other words, it’s unclear whether Kyiv has all the necessary tools to take full advantage of its new armor.

The second drawback is somewhat more dramatic. If these vehicles help Ukraine take back more Russian-held territory, much of which Moscow now considers to be part of Russia, then the Kremlin may resort to the use of so-called “tactical” nuclear weapons — nukes that are smaller than strategic warheads but still at least as big as the bombs the United States dropped on Japan in World War II.

Russian analysts have largely stopped discussing tactical nukes since a flurry of chatter last fall. But Goldstein worries that a successful offensive could make Russian President Vladimir Putin reach for his trump card, and tanks would likely be an “appetizing target” for such a move. 

The main obstacle standing between Putin and the nuclear button is the “nuclear taboo,” which posits that rational leaders are too wary of their international reputation to use the ultimate weapon. 

“But we’re in the realm of desperate actions,” Goldstein argued. “I don't think Russia is worrying too much about their reputation.”


French soldiers drive an AMX-10 RC light tank through the streets of Paris after their annual Bastille Day march. France announced Wednesday that it would send an unspecified number of these combat vehicles to Ukraine. (Image credit: Kevin.B, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons)
Reporting | Europe
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.