The unsolved mystery of US tanks: Why is Biden not performing? Billionaire’s son found dead in Zurich luxury hotel

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has been heavily criticized: he only wants to deliver Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine if the US government also sends its heavy Abrams main battle tanks there. One question is whether Scholz rightly hesitates or is simply looking for an excuse.

But the other one is, why are Americans holding back anyway? After that it is asked much less often. And there are many arguments circulating designed to make Washington’s no seem logical and understandable. But regardless of whether the reasons are technical, logistical or strategic, only a few convince on closer inspection or even correspond to the facts.

An overview.

>> All current developments in the live ticker

The fuel fairy tale

Perhaps the Pentagon spokeswoman was ill-prepared. But when Sabrina Singh explained to journalists last week why the US is not supplying Abrams, her explanations did not match the technical facts. The Abrams is “a tank that needs kerosene,” while the Leopard and Challenger need diesel, Singh said.

The argument itself is rather questionable. Supplying kerosene to Ukraine is not impossible. But it is also false information that has persisted for weeks in politics and the media on both sides of the Atlantic. Nevertheless, it is repeatedly disseminated in background discussions, on public platforms and in many press articles.

The fuel fairy tale stems from the fact that Abrams in the US mainly run on kerosene. According to the manufacturer, the American tank, which is equipped with a kind of jet engine, also runs on diesel or gasoline. In an emergency with anything else flammable, in case of doubt even with vodka, they say.

The complexity story

Very complicated, high maintenance, too heavy, too expensive, too long delivery routes: if you listen to the Pentagon, you don’t get the impression that the Abrams is the pride of the US Army and one of the best-selling tanks. It seems more like an occasion to be ashamed of. President Joe Biden’s National Security Council spokesman John Kirby also says: The Abrams system is “very expensive to operate, very expensive to run in fuel, very expensive to maintain, and it requires a lot of training. “

However, the more one talks to military and armaments experts in Washington and Berlin, the stronger a different picture becomes: the alleged technical problems are not a sufficient reason not to deliver the Abrams.

At the beginning of January, Poland signed the second purchase contract for the American main battle tanks within a very short time. Abrams had already been sold there from South Korea in December 2022. If the Abrams was as bad as in the picture, Poland would hardly have bought it.

The alleged logistical pitfall

The geographic location of Ukraine has also been cited repeatedly as a counterargument in the United States. The argument is that the 2,000 or so Leopard tanks that exist in Europe are much closer to the action. But if the US actually wanted to ship its tanks to Europe, it wouldn’t be an unsolvable logistical problem.

On the contrary: as part of their NATO strategy, the Americans are real experts in moving equipment and units to Europe. The load might be a few days longer than the Leopards parked in Europe. But that would be the biggest difference.

The supposed interests of the industry

Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, it has been said time and time again that the US wanted to gather orders for its own defense industry in order to gain financial and strategic advantage. Recently, an article in the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” speculated that the US government wanted to get EU states to send Leopard tanks to Ukraine to close the gap with Abrams.

“Circles of the German arms industry” are cited as a source, and they are already complaining that the “US government has been trying for years to increase its arms sales in Europe”. There is no evidence for the stated ulterior motives from the US. What there are, however, are arguments that speak against the said statement.

Like the Leopard 2, the Abrams is considered “exhausted” by armaments experts. A Berlin insider speaks of “a heavy monster” that can no longer be expanded. The latest version of the Abrams is also expected to be the last. Then something new comes on the market. It is said that the German arms industry only wants to use this story as a precaution.

In Europe, the French and Germans have been working together since 2012 on a successor to the Leclerc and Leopard 2. The “Main Ground Combat System” (MGCS) project must deliver the “European Main Battle Tank” from 2035. It is considered agreed that other European countries will also be supplied with it.

“The US could get a foot in the door as a side effect,” says a Washington insider. However, the claim that the Americans urged the Europeans to pass Leopard 2 to the Ukraine so that they could then deliver Abrams to the European armies, is unlikely by the industry expert. “This war is extremely dangerous. The arms industry is not so important and valuable that people would take such geopolitical risks,” he said.

Pressure on the White House is mounting

Given the US administration’s questionable arguments, opposition Republicans are no longer the only ones vehemently calling on the president to free Abrams. Given Germany’s hesitation, there is also increasing pressure from his own party, the Democrats. Last but not least, the Ukrainians and the Eastern European countries also lobbied Washington around the clock.

A simple reason for the US hesitation could be: the US government may not be ready yet. All obstacles can be cleared away. But transport, logistics, infrastructure and training still need preparation. It may be that the government does not want to continue before then.

But just like in Germany, the real reasons are hidden. What weapons experts suspect: As with other types of weapons, the White House is also skeptical about the tank issue because it is an assault weapon. Ukraine could corner Russia with “too fast” successes or become overconfident. Even more violent attacks on its own civilian population could then be the result.

Since Moscow wants to see itself on an equal footing with Washington, heavy battle tanks from the US would be an even greater provocation than the German tanks from Russia as well.