The British are sending the Ukrainians the wrong tanks
The Government has said that it will supply the Ukrainian armed forces with British main battle tanks in the form of the mighty Challenger 2. The logic is compelling: we have spare tanks and Ukraine needs armour for the upcoming spring offensive, when the biting Eastern European winter gives way to more favourable fighting conditions. What is less compelling, however, is the argument that we should give Kyiv Challenger 2.
The first problem is one of simple numbers. The Army currently fields 227 Challenger 2s, divided between three regiments, a training school, and platforms used as reserves or for parts. Ukraine’s defence minister, meanwhile, believes the country needs around 300 tanks. It does not take a mathematician to note that 227 is substantially less than 300, particularly given that nobody really wants to hand over Britain’s front-line units. Instead, the Government intends to give 14 of the 79 platforms due to be mothballed as part of the Challenger 3 upgrade entering service in 2027. A lot is riding on other countries giving tanks, too.
This brings us to the second problem: just because the tanks are mothballed, it doesn’t mean we won’t need them. Most of the existing Challenger 2 platforms will be required for maintenance throughout Challenger 3’s lifespan. The new elements of the Challenger 3 design are mainly in the turret and main gun; this gives a real advantage in maintenance, as most of the rest can be cannibalised from old Challenger 2 platforms when parts need replacing. It would be possible to circumvent this issue by purchasing our new fleet off the shelf, but that takes us to the third matter: the upgrade to Challenger 3 is set to cost £800million. Buying new platforms would increase the cost significantly.
There are also real risks to operational security if British tanks fall into Russian hands. Each Challenger 2 is equipped with Dorchester armour – a classified build no other nation has access to
– in addition to sensitive digitalised communications and sighting systems. Unless these systems are replaced, a difficult task, should a British tank be captured, classified British information intended for use in Challenger 3 would be in enemy hands. This is a threat too grave to bear.
This complexity – the initial retrofitting, the training of Ukrainian tank crews, finding routes for maintenance and sustenance – makes it difficult to view the export of the Challenger 2 as viable, even for the resourceful and battlehardened Ukrainians. Instead, we should look to a smarter option. The Kingdom of Jordan has recently retired its fleet of around 400 British Challenger 1 tanks. This is enough to supply Ukraine with the entire fleet it needs, and the essential spares for battlefield maintenance, without compromising sensitive technologies. It would also be inordinately cheaper for the UK to buy them on behalf of Kyiv.
But the main benefit, again, is quantity, which retains a quality all its own. Realistically, any gift of Challenger 2s is likely to be too piecemeal to supply Ukraine with the support it really needs. But 400 British made Challenger 1s – long obsolete from British stocks and of no national security concern – would provide Ukraine with a ready-made tank division for the all-important spring offensive.
Robert Clark is the director of defence and security at Civitas. Prior to this he served in the British Army
follow Robert Clark on Twitter @Robertclark87 read more at telegraph.co.uk/opinion