While the UK and Ukraine governments remain tight-lipped on operational details, a source has signalled British tanks have crossed into Russia for Ukraine’s Kursk offensive.
15 August 2024
Ukrainian troops are thought to have used British Challenger 2 tanks in their offensive inside Russia, Sky News understands.
If confirmed, it would be the first time British tanks – operated by Ukrainian soldiers – have been used in combat on Russian territory.
The Ministry of Defence in London declined to comment on operational detail, but did tell Sky News there has been no change in policy.
Ukraine’s armed forces did not offer a comment.
According to government policy, the UK has confirmed Ukraine is free to use British weapons on Russian territory.
A source said this included Challenger 2 tanks and signalled that they had been used during the Ukrainian incursion, which began on 6 August.
Details on how and when Ukrainian forces deployed Challenger 2 tanks within the Russian region of Kursk were not immediately clear. Neither was the number of tanks that may have been involved.
But Ukraine’s powerful 82nd Air Assault Brigade is the unit of the Ukrainian armed forces that has been operating the British main battle tanks since last year.
Elements of the brigade are confirmed to be taking part in the Kursk offensive.
The UK agreed to give Ukraine 14 of its Challenger 2 tanks in January 2023 in a move that prompted Germany and the US to follow suit with their versions.
One of the British tanks was destroyed in operations inside Ukraine last September – the first time the Challenger 2 had been taken out in active combat.
In service since 1994, the Challenger 2 tank weighs 62.5 tonnes and is armed with a 120mm rifled gun and a 7.62mm chain gun.
Under UK government policy, the use of any weapons given to Ukraine by the UK must be in line with international law. The military assistance is aimed at helping the Ukrainian military defend itself from Russian attack.
The Times reported on Wednesday Sir Ben Wallace, the former defence secretary, had disclosed how during his tenure he gave permission for Ukraine to hit targets inside Russia using “whatever weapons [were] supplied to it”, with the exception of long-range Storm Shadow cruise missiles.
He suggested the same rules applied to Ukraine’s Kursk operation in Russia.
Sir Ben was quoted as saying if the attack was designed to go after logistics and infrastructure supporting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, it was “perfectly legitimate” for Ukraine to use British weapons.
A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: “There has been no change in UK government policy, under Article 51 of the UN Charter Ukraine has a clear right of self-defence against Russia’s illegal attacks, that does not preclude operations inside Russia.
“We make clear during the gifting process that equipment is to be used in line with international law.”
“We make clear during the gifting process that equipment is to be used in line with international law.”
I can understand wanting to adhere to international law, but Ukraine is facing an enemy that shits, pisses, and spits on every international law, rule, and agreement there is. The allies should give Ukraine at least some leeway in this regard. At least, drop the stupid and ridiculous restrictions on long-range weapons!
How many more poor little children will be murdered by filthy savages before the Budapest signatories stop taking the piss and a) give Ukraine EVERYTHING it needs to win and b) lifts all restrictions on usage?
I don’t think that there is an upper limit to the amount of women and children that mafia land can slaughter with impunity.
The British army has just 157 Challies left, after we gave 14 to Ukraine; representing a gift of 8% of inventory.
The Challenger 3 will enter service “soon” (don’t know when). At which point we absolutely must send all 157 to Ukraine.
The US on the other hand has 2300 Abrams M1’s in stock. They gave 31 to Ukraine; representing 1.5% of inventory. If they matched the U.K. and gave 8% of them to Ukraine, that would be 184; an amount that would make a tremendous difference.
Yes, Washington has shown a piss poor performance in this war.