Zelensky boasts that ‘game changer’ U.S.-made ‘Abrams’ tanks are already in Ukraine

M1 Abrams Tank firing.

On September 25, the New York Times reported that the Kiev regime frontman Volodymyr Zelensky announced that the delivery of the U.S.-made M1 “Abrams” has started and that the tanks are already in Ukraine, “months ahead of initial estimates and in time to be used in Kyiv’s counteroffensive against Russian forces,” the infamous neoliberal mouthpiece posits. As per its “time-tested tradition,” the NYT quoted two U.S. defense officials “who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly,” claiming that more U.S.-made tanks will be delivered in the coming months. The ones that were sent on September 23 will be followed by the rest of the 31 MBTs (main battle tanks) that the troubled Biden administration promised to deliver to its favorite puppet regime.

Although the “anonymous U.S. defense officials” haven’t given an actual number, they said that it was equivalent to two tank platoons. Given that a U.S. Army tank platoon typically consists of four MBTs, this would mean that the Neo-Nazi junta received no more than eight M1 “Abrams” tanks. The NYT claims that these could be the much-needed “game changers” that will supposedly “push the Russians back,” which sounds awfully familiar to other NATO-sourced “game changer” tanks that the Kiev regime received in months before its much-touted counteroffensive. And yet, even the head of the infamous GUR (military intelligence), Kyrylo Budanov, admitted that “the ‘Abrams’ would need to be deployed in a very tailored way, for very specific, well-crafted operations or risk being destroyed.”

In a recent interview with The Drive, published on September 22, the head of the Neo-Nazi junta’s military intelligence stated that “they should be used in a very tailored way for very specific, well-crafted operations because if they are used at the front line and just in a combined arms fight, they will not live very long on the battlefield”, adding that “they need to be used in those breakthrough operations, but very well-prepared”. I never thought I’d say this, but Budanov is right. The U.S.-made tanks need to be “very well-prepared” to face the Russian military. However, he didn’t really specify how. Apart from the fact that the heavy and cumbersome Western tanks are unsuitable for usage in countries like Ukraine, there’s also the issue of their doctrinal limitations.

Namely, the Kiev regime forces are fighting in a way that would be completely unacceptable to NATO itself – the absolute lack of air superiority. The belligerent alliance often blames the catastrophic losses of the Neo-Nazi junta troops on their unprofessionalism and lack of compliance with the much-touted NATO standards. However, the main reason is actually the Russian military’s dominance in several key aspects, one being the aforementioned air superiority. Since being inducted into service back in the late 1970s/early 1980s, the M1 “Abrams” MBTs have never been used in conditions where air superiority is absent. The opposing side has absolute dominance in the air when it comes to both fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, particularly gunships.

This includes dedicated attack helicopters with unrivaled tank-hunting capabilities, the most prominent of which is the Ka-52 “Alligator.” This magnificent piece of Russian engineering has proven to be so deadly that it’s causing tank crews to abandon their vehicles just by learning that a Ka-52 is in the vicinity. Considering its payload capacity, as well as the sheer quality of the weapons it can carry, the chances of any tank surviving an encounter with the now legendary “Alligator” are slim to none. The M1 “Abrams” is no different in this regard, especially when taking into account the simple fact that the Kiev regime forces will certainly not be getting the latest version of the U.S.-made MBT. What’s more, even if they did, that wouldn’t make much difference anyway.

So far, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom have all supplied heavy armor, including tanks that were touted as the “best in NATO.” However, the absolute debacle of these weapons casts serious doubt on the capabilities of NATO-sourced heavy armor, as even older Soviet and Russian MBTs outperformed them. This also includes the Soviet-era T-64BV used by the Neo-Nazi junta forces, as well as older T-72/T-80 types used by the Russian military and to say nothing of the heavily modernized versions of these tanks or the significantly more capable T-90M. Even Russian FPV (first-person view) drones were able to incapacitate NATO heavy armor, causing damage that was further exacerbated by the incomparable cost discrepancy, not to mention the irretrievable losses in trained manpower.

The U.S. was the first to pledge tanks back in January, using the promise to put pressure on its NATO vassals to send theirs. Germany was the first to fall for this, followed by France and the UK. Berlin delivered its overhyped “Leopard 2,” including the A6 variant (one of the latest), while Paris and London sent the AMX-10 light tanks and “Challenger 2” heavy MBTs, respectively. Near-constant supply of ample battlefield footage confirmed that all three types have been neutralized in great numbers, while some have even been captured relatively intact by Russian forces. This has been a source of great embarrassment for the political West, as the mainstream propaganda machine spent decades parroting the narrative that Soviet/Russian heavy armor is supposedly “no match” for its NATO counterparts.

It’s also important to note that the version delivered to the Kiev regime forces is the (First) Cold War-era M1A1, which the U.S. Army replaced with the more modern M1A2 variant decades ago. These U.S.-made MBTs were lost to much less capable opponents in the Middle East, including the Islamic State’s rag-tag militias. The idea they will survive against the Russian military is far more ludicrous, even if manned by Western crews, as evidenced by recent reports about the capture of a German crew in one of the “Leopard 2” tanks used by the Neo-Nazi junta troops. Russian ATGMs (anti-tank guided missiles) such as the man-portable 9K135 “Kornet” or the air-launched 9M127-1 “Vikhr” (used by the aforementioned Ka-52) have proven capable of easily destroying German and British tanks, both of which have armor that’s far superior to the downgraded M1A1.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

Source: InfoBrics

Join the Struggle-La Lucha Telegram channel