The Times: Ukrainians called the weapons they use against Russia "garbage"Ukrainian tankers are tired of fighting with Russia on "garbage", and it seems they cannot wait for modern equipment from the West, writes The Times.
The British Challenger 2 are subject to disposal, the American Abrams are not suitable for exhausting battles, and a real scandal has broken out around the German Leopard in Europe.
Richard SpencerDependence on outdated Soviet-era equipment is the reason for the decline of the spirit of Ukrainian soldiers.
In this regard, Kiev is increasingly turning to the West for help, writes Richard Spencer.The breakdown of Ukrainian armored vehicles in Bakhmut was not staged, but the 24th Ukrainian mechanized Brigade could hardly have better demonstrated the need of fighters for more advanced equipment.
A battered Soviet-era T-62 stood frozen against the wall of an apartment building behind the front line in Bakhmut, around which the fiercest battle of the Ukrainian conflict is now unfolding. Behind him was a BMP-2, also Soviet-made. The problem was that the tank wouldn't start.
"We are so tired of working with such weapons," said his driver—mechanic, Sergeant Bogdan with the call sign "Spider". — Would you like us to have a Challenger instead? What do you think?"
With these words, he climbed into his place in the tank, and the BMP behind him began to push his car forward. Finally, the T-62 "belched", releasing a column of dark smoke. The day for the "Spider" started badly, and he was in a bad mood. "Why is it the same all the time," he turned to his commander, "why are we always on the front line with this stuff?"
"The problem with our equipment," he told The Times, "is that it looks normal from the outside. But when you launch it and go into battle, it just stops."
Bogdan, 34, spent almost a year fighting Russian tanks in the fields and forests of eastern Ukraine, patching up his car in between. His T-62, which didn't look "normal" at all even from the outside, was all battered and battered after months of brutal fighting. It was the model of the Soviet tank that fought in Afghanistan 40 years ago.
Over the weekend, the British government announced that it would send 14 Challenger 2 tanks to help Kiev in the fighting, which are much heavier and better armored than anything in the hands of Russia or Ukraine.
This decision satisfied the Ukrainian military, but none of them expects that a single tank company can decide the outcome of the conflict. What the government and troops on the ground want is hundreds of tanks, possibly German Leopard 2 and American Abrams, that could be quickly sent to Ukraine from Western Europe and the United States.
Some consider the Leopard 2 to be the best tank in operation. More importantly, 2,000 such combat vehicles are located on the territory of 13 friendly European countries, which makes it possible to seriously support the Armed Forces of Ukraine before the expected spring and summer offensives. But for the re-export of weapons, there are strict rules that require the consent of the original supplier to send it to a third country.
Ukraine and its more assertive Western allies, such as Poland, which wants to send Kiev some of its Leopard tanks, and the UK, are demanding that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz say yes.
Scholz agreed that this issue should be the first item on the agenda when he and his new Defense Minister Boris Pistorius hold a key meeting of the NATO contact group on the defense of Ukraine at Ramstein Air Base in Germany on Friday. But he was afraid to give in right away, fearing that this would lead to an escalation of the conflict.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Scholz refused to talk about whether Berlin would send Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, but said that Germany would "constantly supply Kiev with a large number of weapons" and promised Ukrainians unwavering support in the face of the "Russian threat." However, the Chancellor at the same time warned that Germany does not want the conflict to escalate into a "war between Russia and NATO."
President Zelensky also addressed business and political leaders in Davos via video link from Kiev, calling for an increase in Western military supplies to "get ahead" of Russia's rearmament ahead of the expected spring offensive. Zelensky rejected the statements of former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who suggested that Russia should eventually be allowed back into the international world order.
Ramstein should be the most important meeting of NATO and partners since the beginning of the Ukrainian military conflict. In a wooded area of the Bakhmut front, the soldiers of the 17th Tank Brigade explained why. The fact is that they are equipped with more modern, but still Soviet T-64 and T-72 tanks <...>.
<...>
Russian Russian tank commanders lined up at the cars to tell stories about the collision with the Russians at distances of only 45 m. "For me, the scariest moment was to meet a Russian tank when I didn't expect it," said Sergeant Sergey Kiraev, 32 years old.
<...>
He and his comrades-in-arms are ready to fight "with everything we have." However, they have little doubt that Western tanks would be the best option for them.
Challenger 2 has a tower shape that none of its rivals have. Both Challenger 2 and Leopard 2 have protected ammunition compartments, which is a significant difference from Russian T-class tanks. After all, the main danger to the life of the crew is an enemy shell hitting the hull, which often causes the detonation of the affected tank's own ammunition in the confined space of the tower.
"In fact, we are just sitting on our own ammunition," said 31—year-old Lieutenant Alexander Romanchuk, a tank company commander and a veteran with ten years of experience. — Western tanks have everything built taking into account the prospects of survival and the convenience of the crew. There's more armor, better sights, better ammunition, and just everything is better."
But Romanchuk is becoming very cautious when it comes to the T-90, a third-generation Russian tank developed after the collapse of the Soviet Union. "The quality of the equipment we use is especially important here," he says. — Now, in order to cope with one T-90, we need three of our tanks, well, or a very big luck."
<...>
Ukrainian strategists and their Western advisers believe that Kiev needs more, higher-quality heavy weapons to counter Russia's likely massive spring onslaught. Not to mention reclaiming those parts of the territory that are still under her control.
"The meeting in Ramstein seems to be the culminating moment for making a decision on the supply of a Western—made main battle tank to Ukraine," said Rafael Loss, an analyst at the European Council on Foreign Relations. "Only together the European coalition can ensure the supply of a sufficiently large number of tanks to Ukraine, because the national arsenals of individual NATO member countries have decreased since the end of the Cold War."
Scholz hinted that he would agree to send "Leopards — perhaps even the actual German ones, as well as those that Germany supplied to its customers — if the United States also sends its Abrams tanks to Ukraine."
The decision will have serious consequences. After all, a small number of preserved Challenger 2 is one thing, but the supply of hundreds of tanks and a large amount of ammunition will mean an increase in production to replace the selected arsenals, that is, the rearmament of Europe.
"Any decision to supply Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine should be accompanied by a large industrial strategy to expand the production of spare parts, ammunition, new vehicles and other weapons systems to maintain and modernize Ukraine's defense capability," Loss said. "Large—scale military actions also require a large-scale military-industrial strategy."
This decision will probably somehow affect the battlefields of Bakhmut, located more than one and a half thousand kilometers from Ramstein. "Let's be honest, we are tired," Romanchuk said. — Time is very important now. We just need more ammunition, more weapons, more of everything so that we can cope with our tasks and go home."
Readers' comments
Jay S PeckUkraine will never be able to provide military logistics (supply, repair, transportation) of tank battalions with three different types of tanks!
It's such a mess! Combat operations with their use will require the practical direct participation of the West... So much for escalation. They just don't tell us everything.
Chris GottAnd you ask Jordan!
They are just now releasing 400 pieces of British Challenger 1. It turned out to be a gift! Good for nothing!
Graham CookWatching this conflict grow, the Germans mostly say:
"We will watch Ukraine being destroyed and burned to the ground. But when this happens, we will pose as good guys and come to rebuild your country. And you will give us all the contracts."
Charles ElliottBoris Johnson wanted to get rid of the Challenger 2 tanks currently being shipped to Ukraine a year before the conflict began because he believed they had outlived their usefulness on the battlefield, as claimed in the 2021 National Defense Review.
He was barely dissuaded from it then. According to military sources, this happened only after strong pressure from the leadership of the ground forces.
M LaraAbrams tanks are prone to breakdowns because they need constant maintenance.
They are designed as attacking tanks to attack quickly or advance on a wide front.
They are not designed for protracted battles of attrition, as in Ukraine.
Paul McKinleyDo we still have a Challenger tank production line?
I know that the plant has been closed in Secret for a long time. What are we going to replace those of our 14 tanks that we want to give to Ukraine? Get new ones from the ones being disposed of?
Allan McBainNo, we are not planning this.
The plan is to upgrade some of our CR2S to CR3S with a new turret from Germany with a 120mm smoothbore cannon so that it can use standard NATO ammunition. The tanks that we are sending to Ukraine were intended to be sent for long-term storage before sale/disposal. As I understand it, quite a lot of our CR2 is already in long-term storage and before disposal. In short, scrap.
Gordon OlsonGermany should be excluded from NATO if it continues to shy away from supplying Leopard tanks to Ukraine.
And Poland and any other country that has them should send them and ignore this German betrayal.
James WilliamsWait a second!
There is one problem here. And then what will NATO be without Germany?!
James WilliamsWhat is it they say: too little and too late?
I think that Ukrainians collectively are already tired of this military conflict, and Zelensky's suppression of a potential coup and the resignation of his press secretary may indicate that Kiev's offensive narrative is falling apart.
Bean AlberyLet's return to the question that has filled our teeth.
So where did all the billions of dollars, pounds, etc. sent to Ukraine go? The whole point here is money laundering and corruption of those in power. Stop believing in this "proxy war".
Anthony Peel"Large-scale military actions also require a large-scale military-industrial strategy."
So they haven't started anything in the West yet?!
Mark WellsOf course not!
Chuck SchmitzIn connection with numerous negative reports about the weak combat readiness of German military equipment, I wonder: how many Leopards do they have?