[M T]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/world...e-war.html
Any idea of why sending tanks is apparently a red line for Olaf Schulz?

I can't read that article, but other articles have these comments
(source)

Several countries, including Spain, requested German permission to hand their tanks over to Ukraine, but were denied the permits as Berlin continues to struggle with its longstanding policy of refusing to export arms to conflict zones.

(source)

Crucially, Strack-Zimmermann cited the “Zeitenwende” — a historic shift in German foreign and security policy that Scholz announced in February in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — to argue that Scholz shouldn’t justify his reluctance to send tanks by arguing that other allies like the U.S. weren’t sending modern tanks to Ukraine either.
... The Greens’ co-leader Omid Nouripour delivered a broadside against concerns among Social Democrats that the delivery of tanks to Ukraine could trigger an “irrational” escalation by Putin — a fear that was most recently expressed by the SPD’s Secretary General Kevin Kühnert.

The reasons the US is not sending tanks to Ukraine are obvious, and have little or nothing to do with Russia. The logistical support requirements for a tank are at least an order of magnitude (maybe two orders of magnitude) greater than for something like a HIMARS. The training requirements are also much greater, especially when compared to a T-72. They also fire different ammunition than anything else Ukraine has. It would take a massive effort by Ukraine to have this make any sense.

There are lots of things that Ukraine needs more than tanks. More HIMARS (or German MARS if they really want to give something) would make a big difference and not strain the logistics chain too much. Remember when Ukraine said they wanted 50 of them? Ukraine has tanks (and is getting more from Russia every day :-). Ukraine is not engaging or planning to engage in a massive armored thrust anytime soon. They aren't trained for it and aren't resourced for it. They are doing just fine with the approach they used around Kharkiv. There are probably many on Ukraine's general staff that have visions of a large tank army flowing across Kherson Oblast into Crimea. The US doesn't think that is logistically possible or militarily prudent. IMHO the US is right.

As I understand it, the areas Ukraine wants to move into are wide-open plains.  They need to use armored vehicles of some sort to cross, attack, or defend those areas.  Apparently the modern German tanks are more compatible and fuel efficient than the modern US tanks, but still a big change in parts & training required.  If the war stretches on, the parts for the Soviet-era tanks will dry up, while parts for the modern tanks will be replenished.

Certainly, the delivery of tanks this week wouldn't make any difference in next week's battles.  But getting the commitment soon for tanks that are current might pay off in the spring or the next spring, using the winter for training both fighters and maintainers.  I believe Ukraine is planning for that eventuality.

After seeing what a death trap the Soviet tanks are when attacked by a drone, I don't know that I'd want to be sitting in one of those anywhere except during a firefight.  I presume both sides are retrofitting the tanks so they aren't so vulnerable.

[M T]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/world...e-war.html
Any idea of why sending tanks is apparently a red line for Olaf Schulz?

I can't read that article, but other articles have these comments
(source)

Several countries, including Spain, requested German permission to hand their tanks over to Ukraine, but were denied the permits as Berlin continues to struggle with its longstanding policy of refusing to export arms to conflict zones.

(source)

Crucially, Strack-Zimmermann cited the “Zeitenwende” — a historic shift in German foreign and security policy that Scholz announced in February in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — to argue that Scholz shouldn’t justify his reluctance to send tanks by arguing that other allies like the U.S. weren’t sending modern tanks to Ukraine either.
... The Greens’ co-leader Omid Nouripour delivered a broadside against concerns among Social Democrats that the delivery of tanks to Ukraine could trigger an “irrational” escalation by Putin — a fear that was most recently expressed by the SPD’s Secretary General Kevin Kühnert.

The reasons the US is not sending tanks to Ukraine are obvious, and have little or nothing to do with Russia. The logistical support requirements for a tank are at least an order of magnitude (maybe two orders of magnitude) greater than for something like a HIMARS. The training requirements are also much greater, especially when compared to a T-72. They also fire different ammunition than anything else Ukraine has. It would take a massive effort by Ukraine to have this make any sense.

There are lots of things that Ukraine needs more than tanks. More HIMARS (or German MARS if they really want to give something) would make a big difference and not strain the logistics chain too much. Remember when Ukraine said they wanted 50 of them? Ukraine has tanks (and is getting more from Russia every day :-). Ukraine is not engaging or planning to engage in a massive armored thrust anytime soon. They aren't trained for it and aren't resourced for it. They are doing just fine with the approach they used around Kharkiv. There are probably many on Ukraine's general staff that have visions of a large tank army flowing across Kherson Oblast into Crimea. The US doesn't think that is logistically possible or militarily prudent. IMHO the US is right.

As I understand it, the areas Ukraine wants to move into are wide-open plains.  They need to use armored vehicles of some sort to cross, attack, or defend those areas.  Apparently the modern German tanks are more compatible and fuel efficient than the modern US tanks, but still a big change in parts & training required.  If the war stretches on, the parts for the Soviet-era tanks will dry up, while parts for the modern tanks will be replenished.

Certainly, the delivery of tanks this week wouldn't make any difference in next week's battles.  But getting the commitment soon for tanks that are current might pay off in the spring or the next spring, using the winter for training both fighters and maintainers.  I believe Ukraine is planning for that eventuality.

After seeing what a death trap the Soviet tanks are when attacked by a drone, I don't know that I'd want to be sitting in one of those anywhere except during a firefight.  I presume both sides are retrofitting the tanks so they aren't so vulnerable.