Key Points: The AbramsX, the U.S. Army’s next-generation battle tank, features hybrid-electric propulsion, artificial intelligence-assisted systems, and improved maneuverability. Some, however, doubt the new tank is needed.
-While the Pentagon shifts focus to amphibious and aerial operations for potential Indo-Pacific conflicts, the AbramsX retains relevance for ground warfare in unpredictable scenarios.
–Tanks like the AbramsX have demonstrated utility in conventional conflicts, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan, and lessons from Ukraine and the Middle East emphasize their continued importance.
-Although the U.S. Marine Corps has shifted away from tanks under Force Design 2030, the AbramsX ensures the Army remains prepared for diverse threats and unexpected contingencies in modern warfare.
AbramsX: The Tank of the Future or Relic of the Past?
The United States is currently in the final stages of producing its next-generation battle tank, the AbramsX. The US Army, which specializes in tank warfare and winning in such a threat environment, plans to use the AbramsX in future conflicts. However, questions arise due to America’s rapidly changing geopolitical situation. Does the Army need a new tank?
The Pentagon is currently preparing for contingencies in the Indo-Pacific, where a rapidly growing Chinese navy and renewed aggression from North Korea are prominent. With an emphasis on amphibious operations and aerial supremacy for the US Armed Forces going forward, the question remains—can the AbramsX have influence in modern war? And, in fact, the era of the tank over?
The AbramsX, Explained
General Dynamics is currently producing the AbramsX as a next-generation machine in tank warfare.
The upgrades will be the most thorough of American tanks since the Cold War
Enhanced with upgrades, the AbramsX will have a hybrid electric diesel engine to help the tank run more smoothly with less logistical efforts to refuel it.
AbramsX Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
The enhancements will also entail artificial intelligence, a smaller tank, and a maintenance crew.
Though there are fears that artificial intelligence will make mistakes, General Dynamics reassured that the AI systems will not be autonomous. The tank crews will have the final say on all targeting decisions.
A New Doctrine Away from Tank Warfare?
Emerging security concerns in the Indo-Pacific, especially in Eastern and Southeastern Asia, are leading American forces to turn to their amphibious roots.
Adversaries are making moves on strategic allies, such as North Korea on a path of war footing with South Korea, China exerting aggression against the Philippines and Vietnam in the South China Sea, and an unthinkable potential invasion of Taiwan by the CCP.
The US Navy and Marine Corps must react quickly by air and sea to more prominent fronts. A potential war in the South China Sea, Taiwan Straits, or even the Korean Peninsula would be fought primarily with the air superiority doctrine, mitigating the need for tanks such as the AbramsX.
The United States Marine Corps is phasing out its tank battalion to meet Force Design 2030. The majority of the Marine Corps’ 450 tanks have been transferred to the Army for a lighter, quicker-reaction USMC.
AbramsX. Image Credit: Screenshot.
Former Marine Commandant General H Berger initiated Force Design 2030 to prepare for contingencies as the US military will return to its amphibious routes. General Berger explained the transfer of tanks and stated that Marines would battle, and the Army, due to its size, would win the wars and, therefore, would need the Abrams more.
Current plans of the Marines include the Littoral Regiments that will enable small teams to disperse across islands across the Asian Pacific to decimate and destroy enemy ships if a major war were to break out in the region.
Despite Seldom Use, Tanks Still Have a Place in Military Contingencies
Despite the Littoral Regiments’ current plans and the focus on the Asian Pacific, tanks such as the AbramsX still have a place in modern warfare.
Even though current strategic planning includes contingencies on amphibious warfare, aerial supremacy, and the counter-landing doctrine, tanks can be used in combat scenarios where America seldom used them.
During the war in Afghanistan, foot patrols were frequent due to the grueling and rigorous mountainous terrain of the country. However, to track down the Taliban, American military tank crews were able to zero in and liquidate insurgents with Abrams, which had the luxury of blending into the environment with its desert pattern.
A major factor in mission planning is to expect the unexpected, and because of such unpredictable circumstances, tanks still have a place in warfare. Historically, the Pentagon has gone through various scenarios of potential wars that could have occurred but never did.
M1 Abrams. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
During the Cold War, the Pentagon built a significant tank fleet to prepare for a potential major war with the Soviet Union. However, such a war never happened, and instead, America’s most brutal conflict during the Cold War was in Vietnam, which involved jungle warfare and little to no tanks.
Despite having a significant land army, Saddam Hussein Saddam Hussein was defeated by the Abrams tank and American air superiority, which destroyed the Baathist Republic Guard. Nevertheless, Abrams tank crews received significant combat data from engagements in conventional warfare that are studied today.
A primary focus should be preparing for any wars. Despite a focus on amphibious routes, currently, the global top wars today between the Russian invasion of Ukraine and in the Middle East primarily involve ground warfare where tanks are used frequently.
A rapidly changing global landscape shows the United States that the Pentagon should focus on amphibious warfare, aerial supremacy, and tank warfare.
The AbramsX has an opportunity to set the tempo on ground warfare as much as the F-35 with aerial combat and, therefore, has a place in modern warfare.
M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
About the Author: Julian McBride
Julian McBride is a forensic anthropologist and independent journalist born in New York. He is the founder and director of the Reflections of War Initiative (ROW), an anthropological NGO which aims to tell the stories of the victims of war through art therapy. As a former Marine, he uses this technique not only to help heal PTSD but also to share people’s stories through art, which conveys “the message of the brutality of war better than most news organizations.” Julian is also a new 19FortyFive Contributing Editor.
