Tanks for Ukraine: Too little, too late is not good enough

The Biden administration has announced that it finally will send M-1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine. But not anytime soon. It is not immediately sending even a company’s worth of tanks — about 14 vehicles — to Kyiv to help Ukraine cope with an expected Russian spring offensive. Instead, the White House is expected to acquire 31 tanks from industry, which will become available to the embattled nation in many months’ time, or even longer.  

The White House announcement has spurred a reluctant German government to agree both to send its own Leopard 2 tanks and to permit allies wishing to send their own Leopard tanks to Ukraine to do so. But unlike Washington, which is unprepared to release any tanks from its stocks that are estimated to total as many as 8,000 tanks (at least 3,500 are in storage), the Europeans are ready to send the Ukrainians vehicles from their own currently available stockpiles. 

The Germans will send 14 tanks from their current stocks, which total only about 310 vehicles. Germany said these tanks are but a first tranche, with more to follow. Poland, which had threatened to send Leopards to Ukraine over German objections, will be sending a similar number from its force of 126 Leopards. Together, these tanks will support two Ukrainian armored companies. 

Norway, which operates 100 Leopard tanks and has another hundred in storage, has said it is prepared to send a number of tanks to Kyiv. Spain, likewise, is prepared to send Leopards from its force of 327 vehicles. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte has indicated that the Netherlands may be prepared to purchase 18 Leopards, which it currently leases from Germany, and to transfer them to Ukraine. Should each of these countries match at least the 14 tanks that Berlin and Warsaw have committed to Ukraine, combined with the 14 Challenger main battle tanks that Britain will be sending to Kyiv, Ukraine would possess enough tanks to meet the requirement for the equivalent of nearly two armored battalions that could help to thwart the expected Russian offensive. 

Relative to Europe’s contributions from their far more limited stocks, the American commitment to send only 31 tanks seems rather half-baked.  

Military analysts estimate that Ukrainian troops would require three months to train on the Leopards. Doing so would enable them to employ tank units against the expected Russian offensive. Since Ukrainian forces have demonstrated a capacity for accelerating their mastery of Western systems that they receive, it is likely that the tank units would be battle ready even earlier. 

It may take longer for the Ukrainians to train to operate the Abrams than the Leopard. Nevertheless, just because the Abrams is turbine-driven and a high-maintenance system does not mean Kyiv’s forces could not learn to operate and maintain it by mid-spring — if the tank were shipped to them immediately. Challenger tanks are also exceedingly complex, but that has not prevented Britain from preparing to send them to Kyiv sooner rather than later. 

As expected, Russia reacted harshly to the American and German announcements. Anatoly Antonov, Russia’s ambassador to Washington, has called any transfer of Abrams tanks to Germany “another blatant provocation against the Russian Federation.” Sergei Nechayev, Russian ambassador to Germany, went even further, warning the Europeans that “this extremely dangerous decision takes the conflict to a new level of confrontation.”  

The Europeans are demonstrating their readiness to face down Moscow’s threats despite their proximity to Russia. In sad contrast, the White House decision to delay actually shipping tanks to Ukraine until well after hostilities intensify in the spring — and, indeed, perhaps after Ukraine has suffered some setbacks on the battlefield — reflects once again the administration’s unfortunate habit of deterring itself for fear of Russian retaliation.  

Russia has employed threatening language every time the Free World has intensified its military support for Ukraine. Earlier in the conflict, several prominent Russians spoke of unleashing tactical nuclear weapons to gain a decisive military advantage over Ukraine. Yet, apart from continuing to devastate Ukraine’s infrastructure and target its civilian facilities and population, Moscow has not escalated. Vladimir Putin, who previously stated that Russia would use “all means available” in the war, subsequently has denied any plan to employ nuclear weapons, stating, “We see no need. … There is no point in that, neither political, nor military.”  

The Biden administration’s constant arguments against sending tanks to Ukraine because of their complexity ring hollow since it nevertheless is now prepared to send them to Kyiv. Its concern about instigating World War III — which prevented it from sending HIMARS rocket systems and Bradley armored personnel carriers many months after the Ukrainians desperately called for them — now looks misplaced: World War III has not happened. Perhaps, had these weapons and the tanks been sent to Ukraine in March or April 2022, the war might have ended by now.  

The administration certainly should be credited for its willingness to commit over $110 billion to support Ukraine. And it eventually did send Ukraine many increasingly powerful weapons systems. Nevertheless, it is high time the administration ceased to drag its feet regarding the Abrams tanks. In the face of an impending Russian offensive, too little, too late is simply not good enough. 

Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was under secretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy under secretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.