German Analysis of Weapon Transfers to Ukraine Makes Sober Reading

The German news outlet Spiegel, citing a presentation given by the deputy military attaché of Berlin’s embassy in Kyiv to an audience at the Bundeswehr’s non-commissioned officer school in Delitzsch, Saxony in January, reported that he had given an unvarnished assessment of the performance of German weapons in combat in Ukraine.

The good, the bad, and the indifferent

The attaché’s words, based on feedback received from Ukrainian troops, have proved to be sober reading for both Germany’s military and its arms manufacturers. He described in clear terms what was good, bad and indifferent about the German weapons systems gifted to Kyiv.

Ironically the weapons system that was commented on most favorably was the Gepard self-propelled anti-aircraft cannon system, that the Bundeswehr had written off and was in the process of decommissioning – many of the weapons provided to Ukraine were taken out of mothballs or purchased from third party users. It was assessed as the “most popular, most efficient, and most reliable weapon system” with Ukraine users.

The IRIS-T air defense system was considered highly effective, but the cost of its missiles was too high, and they were not available in sufficient quantities to make a huge contribution to Ukraine’s defenses. Similarly, while the US Patriot systems provided by Germany were excellent, the MAN trucks on which Berlin’s versions were mounted were “too old “and spare parts were impossible to obtain meaning the systems were rarely available for combat.

The older Leopard 1A5 main battle tank and its main armament was extremely reliable but its “weak armor” made it unsuitable for anything other than as a defensive weapon firing from entrenched positions except for those that Ukraine was able to “up-armor” by fitting Ukrainian designed explosive reactive armor (ERA) and “cope cages.”

Meanwhile the newer German Leopard 2A6s, while superior to their predecessor, proved almost impossible to maintain in the field as did the Pzh-2000 self-propelled howitzer which Ukrainian gunners described as “outstanding” but technically so “vulnerable” and difficult to maintain that they questioned its suitability for combat.

These inherent maintenance issues were exacerbated, according to Ukrainian feedback, by the rapid rate of training on equipment prior to it being deployed which gave only rudimentary preparation for in-the-field maintenance along with inadequate supplies of frontline infrastructure.

Ukraine has, therefore, had to rely on establishing centralized repair hubs often positioned a long way back from the combat zones resulting in unacceptable delays in getting the equipment back into the field.

Ukrainians also expressed problems with the five Mars II rocket launchers, supposedly an improved version of the US M270 system, which they said could have been a “game changer” but were unfortunately not compatible with US supplied cluster munitions – the German system had been modified to only allow missiles fitted with unitary warheads to be fired after Germany joined the cluster munition ban in 2010.

Similarly, the fire control systems fitted to German howitzers had to be reprogrammed to allow “non-German” ammunition to be accurately used with them.

A spokesperson for the German Ministry of Defense declined to comment on the news site’s report other than to say Berlin is in constant communication with the Ukrainian authorities regarding all delivered weapons systems, repair options, spare parts supply, and ammunition supply.

Sara Nanni, the security policy spokesperson for Germany’s Green Party said: “We must enter into close, cooperative dialogue with Ukraine and look at precisely these deficiencies and take them into account for future procurement.”

Summarizing its report, Spiegel commented that “Hardly any large German equipment [provided to Ukraine] was fully suitable for war.”

Source: Kyiv Post