- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
AW&ST piece notes the relevance of tanks in Afstan, quite a bit on Canada:
Future of Main Battle Tank Looks Secure
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/dti/2011/02/01/DT_02_01_2011_p39-284185.xml
Mark
Ottawa
Future of Main Battle Tank Looks Secure
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/dti/2011/02/01/DT_02_01_2011_p39-284185.xml
The decision late last year by the U.S. Marine Corps to send a tank platoon to Afghanistan was criticized by some analysts, who rejected the idea that M1A1 Abrams tanks could be useful in a counterinsurgency (COIN) environment.
But for all the talk in recent years of the civilian population representing a center of gravity in COIN operations, and the corresponding need to cut back on air strikes, long-range artillery fires and other initiatives, one aspect of COIN has often been ignored—even with the outreach, local alliance-building and efforts to spare civilians from the ravages of war, the need remains to kill the enemy.
As such, what the Marines are doing in southern Afghanistan with a platoon of tanks is hardly unusual. Main battle tanks (MBT) have been used successfully by the Canadians and the Dutch in southern Afghanistan, and by the Israelis, who learned hard lessons from bitter fighting in Lebanon in 2006, and went in heavy in Gaza in 2008-09...
In Afghanistan, the Canadians and Dutch have used tanks to great effect—even providing fire support for British troops. Canadian Army Maj. Trevor Cadieu wrote in The Canadian Army Journal that after the Canadians deployed a squadron of Leopard 2 tanks to Kandahar in December 2006, “the tank squadron and armored engineers featured prominently in all major combat operations . . . Since May 2007, the tank squadron has fought almost constantly alongside Canadian and Afghan infantry in close combat with the Taliban.”
The Canadians found so much success in Afghanistan with the German-made Leopard tank that they revised plans for the structure of their ground forces. In 2001, Canada decided not to replace its aging Leopard I tanks, but to ride them until they died and transition to a lighter force structure using the Stryker-like light armored vehicle (LAV) infantry carriers as their heaviest equipment. It wasn’t long before the powerful roadside bombs Canadian troops encountered in southern Afghanistan changed this, prompting Ottawa to start a crash program to buy surplus German and Dutch Leopard 2 tanks, which began arriving in Afghanistan in 2008.
The Dutch had much the same experience with the Leopard 2 in Afghanistan, claiming that the tank’s 120-mm. gun is so accurate it minimizes civilian casualties...
Mark
Ottawa