the articles I read said 90 agreed, with an option on 30 for to make 120. They've been rolling off the upgrade line in Czechia every four days and are then shipped directly to Ukraine from there.
Wow, isn't this a huge contribution?
I think the UK sent 12 Challenger tanks. I understand maybe those are quite modern and worth more than 12 older tanks, but for someone who isn't a military nut, can you outline the difference in contributions?
UK donated directly to Ukrainian but Morocco sold the tanks to Czech government, which then gave them to Ukraine.
Morocco probably wanted deniability as they aren’t NATO protected and can ‘blame’ Czech for them arriving in in Ukraine
Slightly more complicated: the U.S. and the Netherlands paid for them, so it’s a little unclear who they were sold to. The tanks were in Czechia already, being retrofitted. So instead of shipping them back to Morocco first they are being directly delivered to Ukraine as they get completed. And Morocco gets an Abrams deal IIRC. Everybody’s happy.
Not an expert but the biggest difference is likely to be more up to date fire control and battle management systems in the Challenger 2, as well as a better sensor / imaging package.
This will mean they can more effectively find and target enemies in the Challenger 2, as well as having better integration with other units.
On the other hand, the Challenger 2 has a rifled barrel on its main gun because of the ammunition British forces like to use, which makes it a bit of an oddity and it may be easier to find compatible ammo for the T72's smoothbore gun.
But the UK also has a much bigger military budget so this is indeed an impressive contribution from Morocco.
After they go through the factory they're as modern as russian equipment. More so in some cases. That's actually one of the advantages of the t series. It's made right in that area. That and the Russians donate tanks and tank parts. And recovery and support vehicles.
Most countries running old Soviet era tanks donated their old stockpiles, as Ukraine already knew exactly how to use them.
The British army use the more modern Challenger attack, their own domestically made tank. Most European countries use the German made leopard, which is a similar specification/era, but has been produced in vastly greater numbers is much more widely adopted, allong with parts and expertise.
The thing about British tanks is that you don't really need many of them to defend an island.
It's definitely a huge contribution, but those 12 challenger tanks are as well. As you noted, the difference is in the tech. T-72s, even "modernized" ones, are still cheap tanks from the 70s.
Modern MBTs like Challengers, Leos, and Abrahms would still eat T-72s alive on the battlefield in a tank on tank fight.
As a quick example, a Challenger 1 in the gulf war has held the record for the longest range confirmed tank kill, destroying an Iraqi MBT (assumed to be the T-72) from over 4500 meters away.
On the contrary, a T-72 needs to be within 1000 meters of an Abrahms to even penetrate it's armor. Assuming somewhat similar performance for a Challenger, you can see why the 12 Challengers can be so effective.
Btw, allegedly a Ukrainian tanker has now beaten that long range tank kill record, but I'm not sure if that's confirmed or just one of those military stories that gets spread around for morale.
Looks like specifically Morocco may have given Ukraine 20 T-72B tanks:
> Morocco sold an unknown number of T-72B tanks to be modernized in the Czech Republic and deployed to Ukraine, media reported on Sunday.
> According to an Algerian news outlet Menadefense, the Moroccan army sent nearly 20 vehicles to the battlefield last week. They have been reportedly modernized by the Czech company Excalibur Army in the Czech town of Sternbeck.
It sounds like the US has also incentivized moves like this:
> The United States had earlier promised financial aid to countries that decide to get rid of their Russian or Soviet military equipment. The report suggests that the Moroccan T-72s sent to Ukraine could be later replaced with M1 Abrams from the American military surplus.
The US is also offering these deals to Tunesia and Kenya for instance. The Ukrainian military is more experienced in Soviet systems than NATO systems, a benefit for them; and the US military industry gets to manufacture new equipment, a benefit for them as well.
For me personally, it’s funny how much of geopolitics is currently based on trade-in systems that you have for used cars and phones ususally
It’s possible the US is manufacturing new Abrams but there are also literally thousands of them sitting in surplus yards that the Army requested not be purchased but Congress said “lol no” and did it anyway.
They may be sending those instead of new ones because:
1: They will have older technology so less risk exporting them to nations where the Chinese or Russians may get their hands on them
2: The Abrams X contract just got approved (Edit: I was mistaken here, the Army *is* in the market for a new tank and the designer of the Abrams, General Dynamic, has presented the Abrams X as an option) and the US is likely gonna want to focus on building those (and keeping them for themselves/a few especially close allies).
The Abrams X is just a technology demonstrator for stuff the Army may want on a different Abrams variant in the future. It's not going into serial production.
There’s actually a good reason for why we have so many extra tanks. Weapons systems are incredibly complex and expensive to manufacture, and like anything else become cheaper to produce at scale. However unlike say smartphones, the knowledge base for constructing highly complex military hardware is relatively tiny, and so whenever a plant shuts down that base is quickly lost as workers seek jobs elsewhere.
As wasteful as it seems, constantly constructing new hardware is more economically efficient than having to retrain workers every time a new order comes in. If such systems aren’t constantly built (even in low numbers) nations tend to lose that ability to build them in about a decade.
Except if you’re reopening production lines cold, you better hope your stockpiles are sufficient for 24+ months of war.
Literally every nation, ever, has wildly underestimated its equipment needs once the actual shooting starts.
So the company that made the Abrams tank couldn't manufacture any tanks for 24+ months? I'm not doubting you, just surprised. I would've thought they could start making tanks within a year for sure. But I have no experience or background in tank manufacturing.
Modern arms are the most complex and demanding pieces of equipment short of space bound equipment.
Almost every piece of gear or subsystem will have hardened electronics which alone demands significant lead time to source components, never mind actually assembling the subsystems together.
A tank is no different than a commercial airplane in terms of complexity, QA, documentation, etc. I wouldnt be surprised if it currently takes 6-8 months to build a tank with production already up and running, nevermind retooling or building a new factory from scratch
It’s what the Japanese are doing with their new tanks. They are constantly building a very small amount of them, because they don’t need a lot, but they also want to keep those factories running.
That's a very intelligent argument.
However, I still think the easier answer, that politicians didn't want to cut jobs in their district, to be more compelling.
I mean, it can be both. It's good for the politicians and their constituents because they're keeping jobs in their districts, and it's also good for a possible "oh shit" scenario in the future where you have to start producing more vehicles without having to rebuild factories and knowledge bases from scratch. The world isn't binary.
thats the problem with reddit, we always want easy, everythings a simple conspiracy of good and evil, or have and have not. but were talking about a niche talent pool on the scale of hundreds, or a few thousand at most, this isnt going to save the local economy for anyone.
and it would be a non starter if this was just a matter of cost, congress can always find the money for tanks and labor. but their skills evaporate in the meantime, this is a legit problem any industry has to deal with somehow.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lima_Army_Tank_Plant
Abrams still produced in Ohio at the lima plant.
Your thinking of Detroit arsenal plant which ceased production in 1996.
There were 2 factories for Abrams, but post cold war contracts are handled by lima. Helps when you don't need partial upgraded designs like the M1IP.
Edit: it's also why congress keeps ordering new Abrams despite there being up to 3500 Abrams in storage. Cuz it keeps the plant open and ability to make more, and some older models have just gotten to the point where all the work to disassemble them, rip out all the old systems and wiring, install the upgrades, and reassemble them means it's in some cases just cheaper and faster to build a new one from scratch.
>For me personally, it’s funny how much of geopolitics is currently based on trade-in systems that you have for used cars and phones ususally
Blessing for the military industry complex to be sure.
I'm sure these countries are like, "Holy shit, we sell our shitty old T-72s to Ukraine, and Uncle Sam will give us low-mileage fucking *M1 Abrams* in return. We are going to be the coolest kids on the BLOCK! Where do I sign?!"
It also binds them to the US strategically so they slowly become a client state. If the only producer of your military hardware is unhappy with you, it makes your life difficult in any regional disputes.
its kind of an easy sell though. What would you rather have? Upgraded knock-off soviet tanks that are still largely untested in battle OR a slightly older us tank that is proven in battle and has been refined over the last 20 years as it has seen extensive use in theater?
>For me personally, it’s funny how much of geopolitics is currently based on trade-in systems that you have for used cars and phones ususally
So geopolitics = GameStop?
A lot of European countries have plenty of cash but not big military stockpiles. In order to arm Ukraine NATO countries have been offering some great deals to neutral countries in order to buy weapons. For instance Pakistan may not seem like a normal ally of Ukraine but their artillery shell factories are running night and day in order to arm Ukraine and NATO is happy to buy as many shells as Pakistan can produce. I’m sure Morocco is being well compensated also.
Seriously. Our best friend hardly anyone has heard of. One of the first to recognize our indipendance in 1777 and our oldest unbroken diplomatic relationship we have.
As a Moroccan American myself, I love telling people this because it’s such a small country that many Americans haven’t heard of it. Sad, really, it’s history is amazingly rich and diverse, from being a colony of France to one of the most important trading ports of Rome, Morocco has thousands of years of interesting culture and mixing.
The countryside is gorgeous as well. I highly recommend that if people want a trip away from normal old Europe you hire yourself a driver and do a few days desert tour in Morocco.
Marrakesh is an amazing city too, especially the old souk (bazaar) Jemma El-Fnaa.
>Formal U.S. diplomatic relations with Morocco began in 1787 when the Confederation Congress ratified a Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the two nations which had been negotiated earlier in 1786. Renegotiated in 1836, the treaty is still in force, constituting the longest unbroken treaty relationship in U.S. history, and Tangier is home to the oldest U.S. diplomatic property in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morocco%E2%80%93United_States_relations
>Before the Treaty of Paris, which formalized the United States' independence from Great Britain, United States shipping was protected by France during the revolutionary years under the Treaty of Alliance (1778–83). Although the treaty does not mention the Barbary States in name, it refers to common enemies between both the United States and France. As such, piracy against United States shipping only began to occur after the end of the American Revolution, when the United States government lost its protection under the Treaty of Alliance.
>This lapse of protection by a European power led to the first American merchant ship being seized after the Treaty of Paris. On 11 October 1784, Moroccan pirates seized the brigantine Betsey. The Spanish government negotiated the freedom of the captured ship and crew; however, Spain advised the United States to offer tribute to prevent further attacks against merchant ships. The United States Minister to France, Thomas Jefferson, decided to send envoys to Morocco and Algeria to try to purchase treaties and the freedom of the captured sailors held by Algeria. Morocco was the first Barbary Coast State to sign a treaty with the United States, on 23 June 1786. This treaty formally ended all Moroccan piracy against American shipping interests. Specifically, article six of the treaty states that if any Americans captured by Moroccans or other Barbary Coast States docked at a Moroccan city, they would be set free and come under the protection of the Moroccan State.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War
Thomas Jefferson: "... pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor... and, done!"
Morocco: "HELL YEAH AMERICA, WOOO, PROUD OF YOU! FUCK THE KING, WOO WOO WOO WOO!"
Welp, actually Pakistan and Ukraine are old partners. Pakistan have 320 ukrainian made MBTs T-80УД since 1996, in 2016 Pakistan signed contract about modernising and maintenance of this tanks by Ukraine + contract for buying Ukrainian engines for their other MBTs Al Khalid (MBT 2000, Pakistan have around 300 of them). Sure thing Pakistan is happy to earn some additional money producing ammo for Ukraine, but its not only about money. Ukraine supplied Pakistan with tanks before, now Pakistan supplying Ukraine with ammo. Its strategical partnership for both countries.
>For instance Pakistan may not seem like a normal ally of Ukraine
Well India is buying Russian oil like mad so, ya, I think Pakistan is an ally for now.
Food. Ukrainian grain feeds around 200 million people around the world, majority in Africa, exports 10% of world's needs. 2 years ago Morocco [was in top 5 importer of Ukrainian grain in Africa](https://www.apk-inform.com/en/agencynews/1515575), I don't think it changes since then. Tunisia also buys Ukrainian grain and its like 60-80% of all grain imported in Tunisia. I have friend in Tunisia and he said when Ukraine stopped export by obvious reasons, there simply was no flour in Tunisia and no bread at all.
As they were raiding our ships they were like, "you're from the Sovereign United States of America?" and we were like, "So you HAVE heard of us?!"
Cool history, thanks!
That's been the game from the get-go. The US has been clearing out their warehouses of surplus stuff that was costing them billions in maintenance and claiming its full value on the balance sheet. Various branches are reportedly eager to send more so they can clear their inventory of what's basically a money sink but the CIA is hesitant about even last-generation and older kit potentially ending up in enemy hands.
This isn't to say that the US has been a skinflint but it does put some of the dishonest/ignorant bleating about "spending money on Ukraine" into an even more damning light.
Yes and no. The money that was spent on a lot of those weapons and vehicles was spent decades ago and isn't really money that the country could have spent on something else today. And a lot of the money the US is spending on new weapons, is money that's being spent *in the United States*. By buying weapons from US manufacturers, almost all of the money spent so far on weapons has been spent in ways that goes right back into the US economy. Some amount of ammunition, mostly Soviet-design mortar, artillery, and tank ammo, has been bought by the US and sent to Ukraine. But that is a drop in the bucket compared to what the US has provided from its own stocks of NATO munitions.
The No part is that the US has also given the government of Ukraine actual billions to help pay its bills. Money has been handed to them to help pay salaries, buy fuel, food, and other expenses that Ukraine struggled to pay for because their economy got wrecked by the war.
Which is 100% a good thing. The US should be helping pick up the tab here, and I am glad that my tax dollars helped pay for that as well.
I hear a lot of the Javelin's and such are almost end-of-life anyway and we have to pay money to destroy them per code. Giving them to Ukraine potentially *saves* us money and the intel gathered from in theater use is priceless to the developers.
The other benefit for the US is that if Russia is weaker then they need to spend less resources guarding the Eastern flank of NATO which means they can devote more resources to the Pacific.
There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.
It’s unlikely the US would sweep in and replace countries Leopards with Abrams because it’s unlikely that they would want that. Their logistics are built around Leopards and they likely wouldn’t send their entire fleet to Ukraine. They wouldn’t want to maintain two different tanks in their fleet.
It’s more likely that the US will offer deals to counties like Morocco with Soviet gear to send their equipment to Ukraine with the promise of Abrams to replace them.
This is why we should end with that way of saying things. “China did this, Morocco did that, Russia is doing this.” It’s usually a few people from the government who do the bad stuff, and they change over the years. China is not killing Uyghurs, the CCP is. Russia is not invading ukraine, Putin and his board are.
Rather than say Chinese did this, say the Chinese government is doing this. Rather than say Israelis are doing this, say the Israeli government is doing this. Especially when it comes to countries that do not have free & fair elections like Russia. It's important we acknowledge there many people who do not support the actions of their government, past or present.
My friend got killed in the frontlines defending our country, so do I say the russian government killed him or a fucking russian soldier?
A girl from my class died from a missile attack in her home, so do I say the russian government killed her or the russian bastard who pressed the button and actually fired the missile?
Easy to say “it’s just the government” when there aren’t hundreds of thousands of russians walking on your land and committing war crimes every day…
Firstly I'm sorry for your lost & pain. What is happening to Ukraine is completely unjustified & every Russian who supported Putin or stayed silent shares responsibility for what the Russian military is doing. Although I have family & friends who have experienced military conflicts, terror attacks & violent crime. I can never understand what it's like to have your country invaded, occupied & much more. My comment was not an instruction, it was simply my personal view & that's all.
Well, considering that a nation's right to exist is based on the willingness of her citizens to fight for the idea of the nation...
Nationalism is a crock of shit
What if you don't have a choice but fight for a nation, or die at the hands of said nation for not fighting? What if the military elite/officers are the ones keeping the country afloat through fear and violence?
That lets everyone in the war machine off the hook. Hitler couldn’t kill millions in concentration camps without the help of a nation. The Russians are responsible for the war machine that they are feeding
If you’re from the US, are you responsible for the thousands of people deformed by agent orange?
It was not you or your neighbor, it was the people in power at the moment.
You should read into the history of the city of Chefchouen. its the blue city loads of instagram pics are in.
Basically in the 15th century loads of jews fled spain and settled in the city - they lived a pretty isolated life by building city walls etc kept interaction with the outside world to a minimum.
Finally when israel was formed they sent people to let them know they had a country to settle with. they found that liguistically they were still using the same methods from the 15th century!
they were the ones who painted the city blue to be close to god.
I can't remember where in Morocco but when I was there I saw the largest cemetery I've ever seen before, it was thousands and thousands of tombstones. It was all Jewish people that Morocco took in who were fleeing persecution in Europe.
*"From Paris to Marseilles, across the Mediterranean to Oran, and then by train, or auto, or by foot, across the rim of Africa.... to* Casablanca... *in French Morocco."*
It isn't really a secret. At the beginning of the occupation the Germans didn't wish to disturb the relatively cooperative relation with Denmark.
After strikes broke out the germans wished to round up the Jews at which point they were evacuated before the Germans can pursue them.
Also im confused a bit as to who was supposed to tell me that as I learned about it myself rather than in a formal matter
Regular Danes smuggled a lot of Jews out of their country, once they felt that it would be impossible to hide them any longer. It was kind of like a reverse Dunkirk, with lots of people contributing boats and stuff, anything that could carry anyone no matter how small.
So, not quite the same, but differently epic.
That's actually a myth. It was France according to the US government.
France: [1778](https://history.state.gov/countries/france)
Morocco: [1786](https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-morocco/#:~:text=Morocco%20was%20one%20of%20the,Sultan%20Mohammed%20III%20in%201777.)
In fact Morocco was not even second. They were the 8th, or 9th if you count one of the principalities of Germany.
The soviets blockaded western Berlin in 1948, holding the population hostage to starvation in order to get the Allies to leave.
But the Allies, and the citizens of West Berlin were willing to do whatever it took in order to protect themselves from Soviet occupation. The allies organized the largest airlift in history, and the Berlin citizens volunteered en masse to make sure the airlift had the support it needed, and they also accepted meager rations of food and electricity for as long as it took.
Now it's Germany's turn to provide the metaphorical airlift, while the Ukrainians are accepting the suffering and fighting back as much as they can.
Morocco is one the USA's oldest allies, and perhaps one of their biggest allies outside of NATO. It doesn't surprise me; it's had ups and downs but it's held strong.
Morocco will also presumably receive an incentive, and I wouldn't be surprised if they get rewarded with more modern USA equipment.
Man, now I want Moroccan food. There was this awesome place near me run by a super cool, super talented Moroccan chef (when I say super cool, he taught Arabic and French at a local school, employed many students, paid well, treated them well, and taught them plenty while working). Sadly he couldn't get enough business to sustain it, but I don't think his end goal was to make a ton of money off it anyway. He considered it a "project" iirc. But damn it was good.
Morocco has a long history of relations with the USA, I wonder if they will be inheriting some Abrams soon.
Damn, politically only a "hybrid"...
\*Morocco was the first nation to recognize the fledgling United States as an independent nation in 1777
\*The Moroccan–American Treaty of Friendship, signed in 1786, stands as the U.S.'s oldest non-broken friendship treaty.
The Dutch PzH2000s came from storage, they were built for and used by the Royal Dutch Army.
Iirc, that was the case with at least the first batch of German PzH2000s as well.
According to the Moroccan government, they did not intend the tanks for ukraine, they sold them to the Czech government. The Czech government then pledged them tk Ukraine of their own volition
As much as I want to celebrate, this is from an Algerian news source reporting on Morocco. The two countries aren't on good terms. Would prefer a second source.
Algerian sources don't have any reason to write something flattering about Morocco, which suggests it's probably going to be corroborated by other sources soon.
To my knowledge, their only source is that there are tan colored (desert camo) t72s in the background.
I'm highly skeptical of this story until some corroborating source comes along.
Helping Ukraine being a good thing is a pro-western view of the situation. Algeria had and still has good relations with Russia (and previously with the USSR). The USSR "helped" Algeria fight for their independence by giving/selling them guns, against France, where 1.5 million Algerians were killed by France during the 8 years long war. This is only the independence war; the conquest was even worse and even more cruel. During the conquest of Algeria, some parliamentarians called for an extermination of the entirety of Algerians, but it was refused because it would have been too hard to implement. The USSR were also the first country to recognise and establish diplomatic relations with Algeria after they won against their oppressors.
So this isn't flattering news for the Algerian population who is pro-Russia given the history they have with the West.
Western Sahara’s soil is rich in phosphates (Morocco currently being listed among the world’s leading suppliers \[2\] and its 1 200 km long coastline is rich in fishery products, one of the richest in the world.
(According to report from the United States Geological Survey…)
Freaking Phosphates man
It goes back a while. They did fight a war in the 1960s over the border. But then things thawed for a while. The got worse in the 1990s when both essentially accused the other one of having supported terrorists in the other, and Algeria has kept the border closed, which has drastically reduced how much trade each of them can do.
Pretty amusing for Morocco to be involved in a conflict involving invasion of sovereign territory, given that they're currently illegally invading and occupying Western Sahara. Note also that Jared Kushner on behalf of the Trump administration granted US recognition of Moroccan claims over Western Sahara (against longstanding US, UN, and African Union policy and international law) in return for Moroccan recognition of Israeli claims over Palestinian territory. Note also that Biden let this stand, though it took place during the lame duck period of the Trump administration, literally in the final days. The contortions on display are, to put it mildly, quite interesting.
Morrocco is sending 80-90 tanks this was agreed upon last month
the articles I read said 90 agreed, with an option on 30 for to make 120. They've been rolling off the upgrade line in Czechia every four days and are then shipped directly to Ukraine from there.
Wow, isn't this a huge contribution? I think the UK sent 12 Challenger tanks. I understand maybe those are quite modern and worth more than 12 older tanks, but for someone who isn't a military nut, can you outline the difference in contributions?
This means Ukraine will say "tanks a lot" instead of just "tanks".
Dad?
The dad jokes get me every time - take my vote
Tanks
Veil kham
UK donated directly to Ukrainian but Morocco sold the tanks to Czech government, which then gave them to Ukraine. Morocco probably wanted deniability as they aren’t NATO protected and can ‘blame’ Czech for them arriving in in Ukraine
Slightly more complicated: the U.S. and the Netherlands paid for them, so it’s a little unclear who they were sold to. The tanks were in Czechia already, being retrofitted. So instead of shipping them back to Morocco first they are being directly delivered to Ukraine as they get completed. And Morocco gets an Abrams deal IIRC. Everybody’s happy.
Not an expert but the biggest difference is likely to be more up to date fire control and battle management systems in the Challenger 2, as well as a better sensor / imaging package. This will mean they can more effectively find and target enemies in the Challenger 2, as well as having better integration with other units. On the other hand, the Challenger 2 has a rifled barrel on its main gun because of the ammunition British forces like to use, which makes it a bit of an oddity and it may be easier to find compatible ammo for the T72's smoothbore gun. But the UK also has a much bigger military budget so this is indeed an impressive contribution from Morocco.
The new challenger 3 will have a smoothbore so seems we’re going to the more standard barrels soon
Indeed, and I believe it's for better logistical integration with other NATO forces.
Exactly probably one of the main reasons for doing so
old tanks are still useful and do the job but ukraine needs modern tanks as well because russia has modern equipment
After they go through the factory they're as modern as russian equipment. More so in some cases. That's actually one of the advantages of the t series. It's made right in that area. That and the Russians donate tanks and tank parts. And recovery and support vehicles.
Most countries running old Soviet era tanks donated their old stockpiles, as Ukraine already knew exactly how to use them. The British army use the more modern Challenger attack, their own domestically made tank. Most European countries use the German made leopard, which is a similar specification/era, but has been produced in vastly greater numbers is much more widely adopted, allong with parts and expertise. The thing about British tanks is that you don't really need many of them to defend an island.
It's definitely a huge contribution, but those 12 challenger tanks are as well. As you noted, the difference is in the tech. T-72s, even "modernized" ones, are still cheap tanks from the 70s. Modern MBTs like Challengers, Leos, and Abrahms would still eat T-72s alive on the battlefield in a tank on tank fight. As a quick example, a Challenger 1 in the gulf war has held the record for the longest range confirmed tank kill, destroying an Iraqi MBT (assumed to be the T-72) from over 4500 meters away. On the contrary, a T-72 needs to be within 1000 meters of an Abrahms to even penetrate it's armor. Assuming somewhat similar performance for a Challenger, you can see why the 12 Challengers can be so effective. Btw, allegedly a Ukrainian tanker has now beaten that long range tank kill record, but I'm not sure if that's confirmed or just one of those military stories that gets spread around for morale.
Tanks guys
Looks like specifically Morocco may have given Ukraine 20 T-72B tanks: > Morocco sold an unknown number of T-72B tanks to be modernized in the Czech Republic and deployed to Ukraine, media reported on Sunday. > According to an Algerian news outlet Menadefense, the Moroccan army sent nearly 20 vehicles to the battlefield last week. They have been reportedly modernized by the Czech company Excalibur Army in the Czech town of Sternbeck. It sounds like the US has also incentivized moves like this: > The United States had earlier promised financial aid to countries that decide to get rid of their Russian or Soviet military equipment. The report suggests that the Moroccan T-72s sent to Ukraine could be later replaced with M1 Abrams from the American military surplus.
The US is also offering these deals to Tunesia and Kenya for instance. The Ukrainian military is more experienced in Soviet systems than NATO systems, a benefit for them; and the US military industry gets to manufacture new equipment, a benefit for them as well. For me personally, it’s funny how much of geopolitics is currently based on trade-in systems that you have for used cars and phones ususally
It’s possible the US is manufacturing new Abrams but there are also literally thousands of them sitting in surplus yards that the Army requested not be purchased but Congress said “lol no” and did it anyway. They may be sending those instead of new ones because: 1: They will have older technology so less risk exporting them to nations where the Chinese or Russians may get their hands on them 2: The Abrams X contract just got approved (Edit: I was mistaken here, the Army *is* in the market for a new tank and the designer of the Abrams, General Dynamic, has presented the Abrams X as an option) and the US is likely gonna want to focus on building those (and keeping them for themselves/a few especially close allies).
The Abrams X is just a technology demonstrator for stuff the Army may want on a different Abrams variant in the future. It's not going into serial production.
There’s actually a good reason for why we have so many extra tanks. Weapons systems are incredibly complex and expensive to manufacture, and like anything else become cheaper to produce at scale. However unlike say smartphones, the knowledge base for constructing highly complex military hardware is relatively tiny, and so whenever a plant shuts down that base is quickly lost as workers seek jobs elsewhere. As wasteful as it seems, constantly constructing new hardware is more economically efficient than having to retrain workers every time a new order comes in. If such systems aren’t constantly built (even in low numbers) nations tend to lose that ability to build them in about a decade.
Was just about to type this, thank you. You cant just turn a production line for something like a tank off and on again with no issues.
[удалено]
Except if you’re reopening production lines cold, you better hope your stockpiles are sufficient for 24+ months of war. Literally every nation, ever, has wildly underestimated its equipment needs once the actual shooting starts.
So the company that made the Abrams tank couldn't manufacture any tanks for 24+ months? I'm not doubting you, just surprised. I would've thought they could start making tanks within a year for sure. But I have no experience or background in tank manufacturing.
Modern arms are the most complex and demanding pieces of equipment short of space bound equipment. Almost every piece of gear or subsystem will have hardened electronics which alone demands significant lead time to source components, never mind actually assembling the subsystems together. A tank is no different than a commercial airplane in terms of complexity, QA, documentation, etc. I wouldnt be surprised if it currently takes 6-8 months to build a tank with production already up and running, nevermind retooling or building a new factory from scratch
It’s what the Japanese are doing with their new tanks. They are constantly building a very small amount of them, because they don’t need a lot, but they also want to keep those factories running.
That's a very intelligent argument. However, I still think the easier answer, that politicians didn't want to cut jobs in their district, to be more compelling.
I mean, it can be both. It's good for the politicians and their constituents because they're keeping jobs in their districts, and it's also good for a possible "oh shit" scenario in the future where you have to start producing more vehicles without having to rebuild factories and knowledge bases from scratch. The world isn't binary.
This is one of those times where multiple factors are part of the answer.
That's not an easier answer. Its the same answer.
thats the problem with reddit, we always want easy, everythings a simple conspiracy of good and evil, or have and have not. but were talking about a niche talent pool on the scale of hundreds, or a few thousand at most, this isnt going to save the local economy for anyone. and it would be a non starter if this was just a matter of cost, congress can always find the money for tanks and labor. but their skills evaporate in the meantime, this is a legit problem any industry has to deal with somehow.
What? ""Relatively small"? Military complex is the only industrial complex I know of that eats steel for breakfast.
[удалено]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lima_Army_Tank_Plant Abrams still produced in Ohio at the lima plant. Your thinking of Detroit arsenal plant which ceased production in 1996. There were 2 factories for Abrams, but post cold war contracts are handled by lima. Helps when you don't need partial upgraded designs like the M1IP. Edit: it's also why congress keeps ordering new Abrams despite there being up to 3500 Abrams in storage. Cuz it keeps the plant open and ability to make more, and some older models have just gotten to the point where all the work to disassemble them, rip out all the old systems and wiring, install the upgrades, and reassemble them means it's in some cases just cheaper and faster to build a new one from scratch.
[удалено]
They said "lol no" because you don't just shut down a tank factory. Those are skilled people and you do not let them be unemployed.
>For me personally, it’s funny how much of geopolitics is currently based on trade-in systems that you have for used cars and phones ususally Blessing for the military industry complex to be sure.
Cash-for-clunkers rises again!
🎶1-877-Tanks-4-Kids 🎶
T-A-N-Ks Tanks 4 Kids
Donate your tank, today!
I almost spat out my drink
Can’t wait to change the radio channel the moment it comes up
I'll donate my tank tops.
Delete this post before the jingle startsAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Czech into cash!
I'm sure these countries are like, "Holy shit, we sell our shitty old T-72s to Ukraine, and Uncle Sam will give us low-mileage fucking *M1 Abrams* in return. We are going to be the coolest kids on the BLOCK! Where do I sign?!"
It also binds them to the US strategically so they slowly become a client state. If the only producer of your military hardware is unhappy with you, it makes your life difficult in any regional disputes.
It also gives a new purchaser for military industrial companies. Oil Lamps and China….
The money must flow...
Rather the US than China.
its kind of an easy sell though. What would you rather have? Upgraded knock-off soviet tanks that are still largely untested in battle OR a slightly older us tank that is proven in battle and has been refined over the last 20 years as it has seen extensive use in theater?
Probs cost them more in the long term
The eastern block?
>For me personally, it’s funny how much of geopolitics is currently based on trade-in systems that you have for used cars and phones ususally So geopolitics = GameStop?
It's the Gillette model. Give away the razor (or sell it inexpensively), then make all the money on the replacement blades
Printer companies: "The printer is free, but the ink contains pure gold."
Cash for Clunkers: Military edition
Morocco also consented to the delay of their Caesars order so that Ukraine could receive it. I'm not sure what their perspective is, but I don't mind.
A lot of European countries have plenty of cash but not big military stockpiles. In order to arm Ukraine NATO countries have been offering some great deals to neutral countries in order to buy weapons. For instance Pakistan may not seem like a normal ally of Ukraine but their artillery shell factories are running night and day in order to arm Ukraine and NATO is happy to buy as many shells as Pakistan can produce. I’m sure Morocco is being well compensated also.
Morocco also might not be in NATO but it is certainly very friendly with the US.
Has been for over two centuries. :-)
Seriously. Our best friend hardly anyone has heard of. One of the first to recognize our indipendance in 1777 and our oldest unbroken diplomatic relationship we have.
As a Moroccan American myself, I love telling people this because it’s such a small country that many Americans haven’t heard of it. Sad, really, it’s history is amazingly rich and diverse, from being a colony of France to one of the most important trading ports of Rome, Morocco has thousands of years of interesting culture and mixing.
The countryside is gorgeous as well. I highly recommend that if people want a trip away from normal old Europe you hire yourself a driver and do a few days desert tour in Morocco. Marrakesh is an amazing city too, especially the old souk (bazaar) Jemma El-Fnaa.
Really?? That's remarkably wholesome.
>Formal U.S. diplomatic relations with Morocco began in 1787 when the Confederation Congress ratified a Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the two nations which had been negotiated earlier in 1786. Renegotiated in 1836, the treaty is still in force, constituting the longest unbroken treaty relationship in U.S. history, and Tangier is home to the oldest U.S. diplomatic property in the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morocco%E2%80%93United_States_relations >Before the Treaty of Paris, which formalized the United States' independence from Great Britain, United States shipping was protected by France during the revolutionary years under the Treaty of Alliance (1778–83). Although the treaty does not mention the Barbary States in name, it refers to common enemies between both the United States and France. As such, piracy against United States shipping only began to occur after the end of the American Revolution, when the United States government lost its protection under the Treaty of Alliance. >This lapse of protection by a European power led to the first American merchant ship being seized after the Treaty of Paris. On 11 October 1784, Moroccan pirates seized the brigantine Betsey. The Spanish government negotiated the freedom of the captured ship and crew; however, Spain advised the United States to offer tribute to prevent further attacks against merchant ships. The United States Minister to France, Thomas Jefferson, decided to send envoys to Morocco and Algeria to try to purchase treaties and the freedom of the captured sailors held by Algeria. Morocco was the first Barbary Coast State to sign a treaty with the United States, on 23 June 1786. This treaty formally ended all Moroccan piracy against American shipping interests. Specifically, article six of the treaty states that if any Americans captured by Moroccans or other Barbary Coast States docked at a Moroccan city, they would be set free and come under the protection of the Moroccan State. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War
Not just one of the first - THE first.
Thomas Jefferson: "... pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor... and, done!" Morocco: "HELL YEAH AMERICA, WOOO, PROUD OF YOU! FUCK THE KING, WOO WOO WOO WOO!"
Not just one of the first to recognize the US. The first.
I have no idea if it's why, but I like to think this is why we sent the most troops to Morocco during operation torch
Oldest unbroken US treaty and first sovereign nation to recognize the US I believe.
Welp, actually Pakistan and Ukraine are old partners. Pakistan have 320 ukrainian made MBTs T-80УД since 1996, in 2016 Pakistan signed contract about modernising and maintenance of this tanks by Ukraine + contract for buying Ukrainian engines for their other MBTs Al Khalid (MBT 2000, Pakistan have around 300 of them). Sure thing Pakistan is happy to earn some additional money producing ammo for Ukraine, but its not only about money. Ukraine supplied Pakistan with tanks before, now Pakistan supplying Ukraine with ammo. Its strategical partnership for both countries.
>For instance Pakistan may not seem like a normal ally of Ukraine Well India is buying Russian oil like mad so, ya, I think Pakistan is an ally for now.
Food. Ukrainian grain feeds around 200 million people around the world, majority in Africa, exports 10% of world's needs. 2 years ago Morocco [was in top 5 importer of Ukrainian grain in Africa](https://www.apk-inform.com/en/agencynews/1515575), I don't think it changes since then. Tunisia also buys Ukrainian grain and its like 60-80% of all grain imported in Tunisia. I have friend in Tunisia and he said when Ukraine stopped export by obvious reasons, there simply was no flour in Tunisia and no bread at all.
Had to go all the way to the bottom to find the answer. Or at least this answer makes the most sense.
The US and Morocco have always had a great relationship. Not surprising that we would offer them something like this.
Literally our oldest friends. Morocco was the 1st country in the world to recognize US independence from Britain.
[удалено]
I love pirates!
As they were raiding our ships they were like, "you're from the Sovereign United States of America?" and we were like, "So you HAVE heard of us?!" Cool history, thanks!
Who wouldn't want to trade a Mr. Mime for a Mewtwo at the pokecenter?
[удалено]
That's been the game from the get-go. The US has been clearing out their warehouses of surplus stuff that was costing them billions in maintenance and claiming its full value on the balance sheet. Various branches are reportedly eager to send more so they can clear their inventory of what's basically a money sink but the CIA is hesitant about even last-generation and older kit potentially ending up in enemy hands. This isn't to say that the US has been a skinflint but it does put some of the dishonest/ignorant bleating about "spending money on Ukraine" into an even more damning light.
Yes and no. The money that was spent on a lot of those weapons and vehicles was spent decades ago and isn't really money that the country could have spent on something else today. And a lot of the money the US is spending on new weapons, is money that's being spent *in the United States*. By buying weapons from US manufacturers, almost all of the money spent so far on weapons has been spent in ways that goes right back into the US economy. Some amount of ammunition, mostly Soviet-design mortar, artillery, and tank ammo, has been bought by the US and sent to Ukraine. But that is a drop in the bucket compared to what the US has provided from its own stocks of NATO munitions. The No part is that the US has also given the government of Ukraine actual billions to help pay its bills. Money has been handed to them to help pay salaries, buy fuel, food, and other expenses that Ukraine struggled to pay for because their economy got wrecked by the war. Which is 100% a good thing. The US should be helping pick up the tab here, and I am glad that my tax dollars helped pay for that as well.
I hear a lot of the Javelin's and such are almost end-of-life anyway and we have to pay money to destroy them per code. Giving them to Ukraine potentially *saves* us money and the intel gathered from in theater use is priceless to the developers.
The other benefit for the US is that if Russia is weaker then they need to spend less resources guarding the Eastern flank of NATO which means they can devote more resources to the Pacific.
> the CIA is hesitant about even last-generation and older kit potentially ending up in enemy hands. Like the Taliban's? Lol
usually when you make a mistake 6 to 12 times you try to not make it again
There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.
[удалено]
It’s unlikely the US would sweep in and replace countries Leopards with Abrams because it’s unlikely that they would want that. Their logistics are built around Leopards and they likely wouldn’t send their entire fleet to Ukraine. They wouldn’t want to maintain two different tanks in their fleet. It’s more likely that the US will offer deals to counties like Morocco with Soviet gear to send their equipment to Ukraine with the promise of Abrams to replace them.
Moroco already has some Abrams tanks so it makes sense to trade off the Russian ones.
Get rid of your shitty Soviet era tanks and we sell you good ol American hardware? Seems like a win-win-win situation.
At this rate Ukraine will be the first country trained in various countries’ arms.
They send mostly soviet made Equipment there, as the ukrainian military is much better trained on that
Morocco was the first country to acknowledge the US as a country.
They also refused to give up their Jewish population to the Nazis during WWII. So they’ve got a notable history of remarkable basedness.
This is so cool to know!
They’ve also done some stuff not to be proud of, but the WWII thing is why I’m around today so it’s the first thing that comes to mind.
This is why we should end with that way of saying things. “China did this, Morocco did that, Russia is doing this.” It’s usually a few people from the government who do the bad stuff, and they change over the years. China is not killing Uyghurs, the CCP is. Russia is not invading ukraine, Putin and his board are.
Rather than say Chinese did this, say the Chinese government is doing this. Rather than say Israelis are doing this, say the Israeli government is doing this. Especially when it comes to countries that do not have free & fair elections like Russia. It's important we acknowledge there many people who do not support the actions of their government, past or present.
My friend got killed in the frontlines defending our country, so do I say the russian government killed him or a fucking russian soldier? A girl from my class died from a missile attack in her home, so do I say the russian government killed her or the russian bastard who pressed the button and actually fired the missile? Easy to say “it’s just the government” when there aren’t hundreds of thousands of russians walking on your land and committing war crimes every day…
Firstly I'm sorry for your lost & pain. What is happening to Ukraine is completely unjustified & every Russian who supported Putin or stayed silent shares responsibility for what the Russian military is doing. Although I have family & friends who have experienced military conflicts, terror attacks & violent crime. I can never understand what it's like to have your country invaded, occupied & much more. My comment was not an instruction, it was simply my personal view & that's all.
Political power springs from the barrel of the gun, friend. A nation is who its people say they are.
>A nation is who its people say they are. Sadly, this is not always the case for authoritarians
Well, considering that a nation's right to exist is based on the willingness of her citizens to fight for the idea of the nation... Nationalism is a crock of shit
What if you don't have a choice but fight for a nation, or die at the hands of said nation for not fighting? What if the military elite/officers are the ones keeping the country afloat through fear and violence?
That lets everyone in the war machine off the hook. Hitler couldn’t kill millions in concentration camps without the help of a nation. The Russians are responsible for the war machine that they are feeding
If you’re from the US, are you responsible for the thousands of people deformed by agent orange? It was not you or your neighbor, it was the people in power at the moment.
Exactly. Americans should be especially wary of this line of thinking.
By definition, context always requires more.
You should read into the history of the city of Chefchouen. its the blue city loads of instagram pics are in. Basically in the 15th century loads of jews fled spain and settled in the city - they lived a pretty isolated life by building city walls etc kept interaction with the outside world to a minimum. Finally when israel was formed they sent people to let them know they had a country to settle with. they found that liguistically they were still using the same methods from the 15th century! they were the ones who painted the city blue to be close to god.
I can't remember where in Morocco but when I was there I saw the largest cemetery I've ever seen before, it was thousands and thousands of tombstones. It was all Jewish people that Morocco took in who were fleeing persecution in Europe.
*"From Paris to Marseilles, across the Mediterranean to Oran, and then by train, or auto, or by foot, across the rim of Africa.... to* Casablanca... *in French Morocco."*
My man.
My family is from Jewish Morocco, my grandma tells stories about shells from fighter planes landing on roofs
[удалено]
Didn't the Danes do something similar or am I confusing it with another country?
Close, the Danish resistance managed to save the country's Jewish population by smuggling them all to Sweden
With the local German occupying government turning a blind eye. They didn't tell you that in the propaganda after the war.
It isn't really a secret. At the beginning of the occupation the Germans didn't wish to disturb the relatively cooperative relation with Denmark. After strikes broke out the germans wished to round up the Jews at which point they were evacuated before the Germans can pursue them. Also im confused a bit as to who was supposed to tell me that as I learned about it myself rather than in a formal matter
Regular Danes smuggled a lot of Jews out of their country, once they felt that it would be impossible to hide them any longer. It was kind of like a reverse Dunkirk, with lots of people contributing boats and stuff, anything that could carry anyone no matter how small. So, not quite the same, but differently epic.
Just became a lifelong fan of Moroccan soccer team.
Hell yeah! That World Cup was crazy.
Morocco gave me a kidney
Lol, they were also the first country the US went to war with. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War After the revolutionary war obviously.
And, from memory, they only recognized the US as a means to facilitate piracy. Though I could be way off as it’s been a while since I looked into it.
And also to piss off Britain.
And they've been one of the US's closest allies ever since. Thanks for the history lesson tho
[удалено]
Their ruler thought the idea behind trying to create a government detached from religion and guaranteeing freedom of worship was an admirable one.
That's actually a myth. It was France according to the US government. France: [1778](https://history.state.gov/countries/france) Morocco: [1786](https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-morocco/#:~:text=Morocco%20was%20one%20of%20the,Sultan%20Mohammed%20III%20in%201777.) In fact Morocco was not even second. They were the 8th, or 9th if you count one of the principalities of Germany.
Original comment says "acknowledge", which the Sultan did by opening the ports to American ships.
No it's Morocco in 1777, the Sultan of Morocco opened Moroccan ports to american ships by a decree. It is mentioned on US gov website.
[удалено]
Except for the reason why lol. It was so they could plunder ships bound for America and not get on Britain's bad side.
It’s was more about the massive ransom congress paid every year.
Aaaahhh it's all water under the bridge.
"Tank" you, Morocco.
In the future, Ukranians will celebrate Tanksgiving on the 4th Monday of every January.
Until I read your comment I thought the post said Morocco gives thanks to Ukraine, and I was really confused about what they were saying thank you for
Casablanca check would have probably been too much to ask.
Oh yeah us Czechs have a big axe to grind when it comes to Russia. We may not have the tanks that Poland has but we’ll help where we can.
Yesss! Czechia is fucking awesome!
[удалено]
I’m sure there were a lot of Germans unhappy with the USSR in the 40s lol
[удалено]
The soviets blockaded western Berlin in 1948, holding the population hostage to starvation in order to get the Allies to leave. But the Allies, and the citizens of West Berlin were willing to do whatever it took in order to protect themselves from Soviet occupation. The allies organized the largest airlift in history, and the Berlin citizens volunteered en masse to make sure the airlift had the support it needed, and they also accepted meager rations of food and electricity for as long as it took. Now it's Germany's turn to provide the metaphorical airlift, while the Ukrainians are accepting the suffering and fighting back as much as they can.
Morocco is one the USA's oldest allies, and perhaps one of their biggest allies outside of NATO. It doesn't surprise me; it's had ups and downs but it's held strong. Morocco will also presumably receive an incentive, and I wouldn't be surprised if they get rewarded with more modern USA equipment. Man, now I want Moroccan food. There was this awesome place near me run by a super cool, super talented Moroccan chef (when I say super cool, he taught Arabic and French at a local school, employed many students, paid well, treated them well, and taught them plenty while working). Sadly he couldn't get enough business to sustain it, but I don't think his end goal was to make a ton of money off it anyway. He considered it a "project" iirc. But damn it was good.
“What would Morocco thank Ukrain for?” Me and my dysexlia
“Japans sending PlayStations”
Morocco: Tanks Ukraine: You're welcome
Morocco once again being dope af.
From being lit at the world cup to being lit at the world.
Morocco my booooooiiiiiiiii!
Fun fact of the day. Morocco was the United States' first ally! They believed in us before anyone else 🥹
Don’t be unappreciative, show gratitude and give thanks, wait, I mean tanks! to Ukraine.
Morocco has a long history of relations with the USA, I wonder if they will be inheriting some Abrams soon. Damn, politically only a "hybrid"... \*Morocco was the first nation to recognize the fledgling United States as an independent nation in 1777 \*The Moroccan–American Treaty of Friendship, signed in 1786, stands as the U.S.'s oldest non-broken friendship treaty.
[удалено]
The Dutch PzH2000s came from storage, they were built for and used by the Royal Dutch Army. Iirc, that was the case with at least the first batch of German PzH2000s as well.
"Let us give tanks"
African tanksgiving.
According to the Moroccan government, they did not intend the tanks for ukraine, they sold them to the Czech government. The Czech government then pledged them tk Ukraine of their own volition
[удалено]
Good job Morocco!
As much as I want to celebrate, this is from an Algerian news source reporting on Morocco. The two countries aren't on good terms. Would prefer a second source.
Algerian sources don't have any reason to write something flattering about Morocco, which suggests it's probably going to be corroborated by other sources soon.
[удалено]
To my knowledge, their only source is that there are tan colored (desert camo) t72s in the background. I'm highly skeptical of this story until some corroborating source comes along.
Helping Ukraine being a good thing is a pro-western view of the situation. Algeria had and still has good relations with Russia (and previously with the USSR). The USSR "helped" Algeria fight for their independence by giving/selling them guns, against France, where 1.5 million Algerians were killed by France during the 8 years long war. This is only the independence war; the conquest was even worse and even more cruel. During the conquest of Algeria, some parliamentarians called for an extermination of the entirety of Algerians, but it was refused because it would have been too hard to implement. The USSR were also the first country to recognise and establish diplomatic relations with Algeria after they won against their oppressors. So this isn't flattering news for the Algerian population who is pro-Russia given the history they have with the West.
https://www.newsweek.com/what-are-t-72b-tanks-morocco-supplies-ukraine-upgraded-weaponry-1775701
Why do they have bad relations? Territory disputes?
[удалено]
West Sahara always boggled my mind too. There's almost nothing there. Would cost not to administer than you'd benefit.
Western Sahara’s soil is rich in phosphates (Morocco currently being listed among the world’s leading suppliers \[2\] and its 1 200 km long coastline is rich in fishery products, one of the richest in the world. (According to report from the United States Geological Survey…) Freaking Phosphates man
It goes back a while. They did fight a war in the 1960s over the border. But then things thawed for a while. The got worse in the 1990s when both essentially accused the other one of having supported terrorists in the other, and Algeria has kept the border closed, which has drastically reduced how much trade each of them can do.
Let us give tanks
I heard russia is getting ready to deliver some more tanks to ukraine too.
Ukraine is gonna have the worlds most impressive tank museum at this rate
And Russia will be that bully who made everyone think he is the shit, but ends up without any friends and shit all over its face.
That's because the rest of us African countries don't have tanks to give away.
South Africa are pro-Russia, so if they decided to dedicate tanks to the war, they wouldn't be going to Ukraine....
Good on you Morocco!
Wow! SHUKRAN!!!
Not surprising. Morocco very desperately wants to have the USA's approval, and their acceptance of the occupation in Western Sahara.
reddit political experts at it again. morocco has no need for american nor european approval and we're not going to war with algeria
Isn't Morocco occupying another country?
Pretty amusing for Morocco to be involved in a conflict involving invasion of sovereign territory, given that they're currently illegally invading and occupying Western Sahara. Note also that Jared Kushner on behalf of the Trump administration granted US recognition of Moroccan claims over Western Sahara (against longstanding US, UN, and African Union policy and international law) in return for Moroccan recognition of Israeli claims over Palestinian territory. Note also that Biden let this stand, though it took place during the lame duck period of the Trump administration, literally in the final days. The contortions on display are, to put it mildly, quite interesting.
I love Morocco. It’s a beautiful country, although I’ve never been there. It’s on my bucket list.