Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_738877015-scaled

US, Germany to send tanks to Ukraine in major reversal: reports

The decision could make a major difference on the battlefield but risks provoking a Russian escalation.

Reporting | Europe
google cta
google cta

In a major reversal, Germany and the United States will send their top-of-the-line battle tanks to Ukraine, though it could be months before they see the battlefield, according to new reports from Politico and the Associated Press.

The decision comes after a week of tense negotiations in which Berlin made clear that it did not want to be the first to provide Kyiv with tanks, which Moscow will no doubt view as a significant escalation of NATO involvement in the conflict. U.S. officials also hesitated to send M1 Abrams tanks, arguing that they would be logistically complicated for Ukraine to operate and require extensive training. 

The deal will end Berlin’s opposition to other states sending their own Leopard tanks, which are made by German companies, to Ukraine.

Suzanne Loftus, a research fellow at the Quincy Institute, worries that the West’s reversal on tanks could “encourage a retaliatory response from Russia that will be even more escalatory.”

“This is going to help feed the narrative that Russia is in a war with NATO,” Loftus added, noting that she expects that many Russians will react to the move with “more anti-westernism and more support rallying around the flag.”

The controversy also “reflects a lack of consensus in the West over how to end the war successfully,” according to George Beebe of the Quincy Institute. Poland, the United Kingdom, and the Baltic states have advocated total victory in Ukraine since the early days of the war, while Germany and France have expressed doubts about the possibility of such an outcome.

“U.S. thinking on this debate appears to be in flux,” said Beebe, who previously led Russia analysis at the CIA. While American officials used to dodge questions of “total victory,” the Biden administration is now reportedly encouraging Ukraine to threaten Russian control of Crimea, possibly in order to force Moscow to the negotiating table.

“This tactic, however, risks precipitating an escalatory reaction from Russia, which so far has refrained from actions that might produce a direct war with the West,” he added.

As RS has previously reported, the tanks will likely give Ukraine a significant boost in its efforts to retake land in its east, possibly including Crimea, which Russia has held since 2014. While the United States had previously sent armored vehicles like the Bradley fighting vehicle, tanks are a much more effective tool for a Ukrainian counter-offensive, according to Dan Grazier of the Project on Government Oversight.

“A main battle tank driving down the middle of a street in a war zone — that’s a real symbol of military power,” said Grazier. “Tanks are not invulnerable, but they’re a lot less vulnerable than other things like Strykers and Bradleys.”

It remains unclear how long it will take for Western tanks to reach the front lines in Ukraine. Grazier, who previously led tank training for the Marines at Fort Knox, noted that introductory training on an Abrams usually takes about three months. And AP reported that the American tanks will be produced to meet Ukraine’s demand instead of being taken from existing stockpiles, meaning that shipments could take from months to years to arrive.


A side view of a M1 Abrams main battle tank. (Shutterstock/ StockPhotosLV)
google cta
Reporting | Europe
What happens when we give Europe first dibs on US missiles for war
Top photo credit: Volodymyr Selenskyj (l), President of Ukraine, and Boris Pistorius (SPD), Federal Minister of Defense, answer media questions after a visit to the training of soldiers on the "Patriot" air defence missile system at a military training area. The international reconstruction conference for Ukraine takes place on June 11 and 12. (Jens Büttner/dpa via Reuters Connect)

What happens when we give Europe first dibs on US missiles for war

Military Industrial Complex

For weeks the question animating the Washington D.C. commentariat has been this: When will President Donald Trump make good on his threat and launch a second round of airstrikes on Iran? So far at least, the answer is “not yet.”

Many explanations for Trump’s surprising (but very welcome) restraint have emerged. Among the most troubling, however, is that it is a lack of the necessary munitions, and in particular air defense interceptors, that is giving Trump second thoughts. “The missile defense cupboard is bare,” one report concludes based on interviews with current and former U.S. defense officials.

keep readingShow less
Brad Parscale Israel
Top image credit: G Holland via shutterstock.com; screen grabs via youtube.com/@AlliesforPeace

Mysterious 'peace' groups are sending Americans pro-Israel texts

Middle East

Jessica, a mother in Alabama, received a text on the evening of January 7.

“Hi, this is John with Friends for Peace. We’re gathering views on Israel today and would like to hear yours. Got a moment to chat? Stop2End.”

keep readingShow less
Combatant commanders
Top image credti: WASHINGTON (Jan. 29, 2008) Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates attend a meeting of military combatant commanders with President George W. Bush in the Cabinet Room of the White House. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Chad J. McNeeley

Cut bloated military commands, get rid of ‘mission creep’

Military Industrial Complex

This article is the latest installment in our Quincy Institute/Responsible Statecraft project series highlighting the writing and reporting of U.S. military veterans. Click here for more information.


keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.