It's interesting how German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has been slightly out played by the US strategic command.
The standoff with the sending the tanks-to-ukraine decisions,was seemingly alleviated when President Biden committed to sending (roughly speaking) a battalion’s worth of M1 Abrams tanks.
This in turn persuaded the German Chancellor to agree to send two battalions of its Leopard tanks. However the US had an Ace up it's sleeve.
The U.S committment was to a manufacturing order not immediate deployment from U.S existing stockpiles. So Germany will be live and "in-the-game" six months before any American armour even leaves U.S shores.
And the Biden administration has been clear about how operationally challenging these tanks can be—in particular, the fact that they consume massive amounts of fuel.
Which largely suggests from the U.S side, it's more a gesture and Germany has been outplayed in a game of Washington bluff.
BlackDiamond wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 12:46 pm
It's interesting how German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has been slightly out played by the US strategic command.
The standoff with the sending the tanks-to-ukraine decisions,was seemingly alleviated when President Biden committed to sending (roughly speaking) a battalion’s worth of M1 Abrams tanks.
This in turn persuaded the German Chancellor to agree to send two battalions of its Leopard tanks. However the US had an Ace up it's sleeve.
The U.S committment was to a manufacturing order not immediate deployment from U.S existing stockpiles. So Germany will be live and "in-the-game" six months before any American armour even leaves U.S shores.
And the Biden administration has been clear about how operationally challenging these tanks can be—in particular, the fact that they consume massive amounts of fuel.
Which largely suggests from the U.S side, it's more a gesture and Germany has been outplayed in a game of Washington bluff.
