M1A Abrams tank.
(Image by Wikipedia (commons.wikimedia.org), Author: US ARMY/HQ VCorps/VCI/Richard Bumgardner) Details Source DMCA
Germany and the United States have finally decided to send tanks to Ukraine to help the country win its war against Russia. The American M1 Abrams tank, considered among the best in the world, as well as Germany's Leopard 2 tank, could potentially act as a decisive factor in this war. On Friday, the allied conference held at the U.S. military base in Ramstein, Germany failed to produce an agreement that would see Germany sending its tanks to Ukraine. But after the US agreed to send its own tanks, it appears that Germany has now changed its mind. Russia's ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, called the move "another blatant provocation" against Russia, but his complaint fell flat. Ukraine, of course, is ecstatic.
Berlin was hesitant to send its Leopard tanks to Ukraine as it did not want to be seen as the only world power sending such weaponry. Once the US agreed, albeit hesitantly and against the advice of the Department of Defense, Berlin gave in. This is significant since this will mark the first time that German tanks will have been used on the battlefield in Europe since the second world war.
Tanks are a formidable weapon in most wars and in this case, with Russia seeking to call up 500,000 more troops in preparation for a new springtime offensive, the tanks are a going to be a crucial factor for Ukraine in regaining lost territory and fighting off a fresh wave of Russian combat forces.
The American M1 Abrams and German Leopard 2 can help win this war in several ways:
- Superior Firepower: The tanks are equipped with high-powered guns and machine guns that can fire a variety of rounds, including armor-piercing shells. This gives them the ability to take out enemy fortifications, armored vehicles, and personnel with relative ease.
- Mobility: The tanks are highly mobile vehicles that can traverse difficult terrain, including mud, snow, and heavy brush. This allows them to outmaneuver enemy forces, making it difficult for them to evade or surround the tanks.
- Protection: The tanks are designed to be highly durable and resistant to enemy fire. Their thick armor can withstand small arms fire, shrapnel, and even some anti-tank weapons, which means that they can continue to engage the enemy even under heavy fire.
- Psychological Impact: The mere presence of tanks on the battlefield can have a psychological impact on enemy troops. The sight of a tank can be intimidating, which can cause enemy soldiers to lose morale and make mistakes.
- Support for Infantry: The tanks can provide support for infantry units by engaging enemy forces at a distance and providing cover for advancing troops. This can help to minimize casualties and allow the infantry to close in on the enemy more effectively.
Overall, tanks are powerful assets in any military campaign. As shown, they can provide a decisive edge in battle by bringing superior firepower, mobility, protection, and psychological impact to the fight. They can also serve as an essential support for infantry units, helping to protect them and enable them to achieve their objectives.
It would seem then that supplying Ukraine with such weaponry should have taken place at a much earlier stage. But it is complicated. As Leonid Gozman points out in The Moscow Times, "a decisive victory for Ukraine seems to scare the West, and their fears aren't entirely groundless as Moscow losing the war would almost certainly provoke a profound political crisis within Russia."
Should Russian President Vladimir Putin emerge somehow from this war relatively unscathed politically, the West will need to deal with him again. It appears that Western leaders understand this and are therefore hesitant to take any action they will have to pay for in the future when the war is over. In essence, Western leaders are still scared of Putin.
Gozman makes another point. He notes that "the principal worry for Western leaders is that a cornered Putin might start a nuclear war. While this fear is now less pronounced than before" estimates of both Russia's nuclear capacity and Putin's ability to ensure such an insane order is followed have changed "the risk of nuclear Armageddon cannot simply be swept under the carpet by responsible world leaders."
Some in the West believe, right or wrong, that a prolonged war in Ukraine would be preferable to a Ukrainian victory, as it could weaken Putin's regime economically, militarily, and politically and thus reduce the threat he poses. It would also prevent an absolute Russian defeat, which could see a spillage into Europe of violence and unrest - and possibly nuclear war.
These are at least some of the reasons Western leaders have been so hesitant to supply Ukraine outright with the weapons necessary to defeat Putin and his army.
Now, we will see how Putin reacts to the news. In front of the cameras he will continue to pretend he is unfazed, but there is little doubt that behind closed doors he is raging. Hopefully, the message from the West gets across until he finally concedes defeat.
And hopefully, he keeps his thumb off the red button.