PUBLISHED on August 17, 2025, 9:17 AM EDT – Key Points and Summary: Taiwan’s new M1A2T Abrams tanks are a significant upgrade over its ancient M60A3s, but they come with a key difference from their American counterparts: they lack depleted uranium armor and ammunition.
-This modification complies with Taiwanese law but is just one of several unique features of the variant.
-While the M1A2T shares the digital sophistication of modern U.S. Abrams, its high weight remains a concern for operations on a mountainous, and potentially swampy, island.
-The acquisition represents a major boost to Taiwan’s defensive capabilities but also highlights the ongoing debate about the suitability of heavy tanks for the island’s unique geography.
Taiwan Has M1 Abrams Tanks (Just Not the American Version)
To comply with local legislation, Taiwan’s M1A2T main battle tanks do not feature the tough, dense depleted Uranium armor—standard issue on American M1s—nor do they use ammunition with depleted Uranium parts or components, opting instead for locally compliant alternatives.
Much vaunted by the United States—and some of its allies—during the Cold War, the M1 Abrams main battle tank remains the heavily armored platform of choice for the United States Army. However, it is not just the United States Army’s tankers that claim that armored platform as their own. Taiwan, too, operates a variant of the M1 Abrams, but in Taiwanese service, it is the M1A2T.
That tank is specially modified to meet the unique strategic and tactical needs of Taiwan. Although it shares the same digital sophistication as the American SEPv2 Abrams variant and the firepower of its American counterpart, Taiwan’s variant is also compliant with the island nation’s legal needs—and restrictions. Instead of depleted uranium armor and ammunition, Taiwan’s M1A2T opts for import-compliant alternatives and integrates local sensors and other systems.
In 2019, when the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the body responsible for vetting and approving military sales abroad, assessed the sale to Taiwan, it had the following to say about the military arms package as a whole, which included more than just Abrams tanks to Taiwan:
“This proposed sale is consistent with US law and policy as expressed in Public Law 96-8.
This proposed sale serves US national, economic, and security interests by supporting the recipient’s continuing efforts to modernize its armed forces and to maintain a credible defensive capability. The proposed sale will help improve the security of the recipient and assist in maintaining political stability, military balance, and economic progress in the region.”
However, the DSCA added that the potential sale of M1A2 tanks would “contribute to the modernization of the recipient’s main battle tank fleet, enhancing its ability to meet current and future regional threats and to strengthen its homeland defense. These tanks will contribute to the recipient’s goal of updating its military capability while further enhancing interoperability with the United States and other partners. The recipient will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.” It added that the potential sale of military equipment, along with associated support, would “not alter the basic military balance in the region.”
When the Abrams tanks were delivered later in 2024, the Taiwanese Ministry of Defense highlighted their arrival on social media, posting photos, text, and videos of the tanks as they disembarked after traversing the Pacific Ocean.
Compare and Contrast
In broad strokes, the M1A2T is largely similar to the US Army’s M1A2 SEPv3 variant, which stands for System Enhancement Package version 3. That variant came about after learning lessons gleaned from the fighting as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and enhances the tank’s weight, power generation, and boosts its survivability.
It also incorporates new vehicle health management, a boon for maintainers, upgraded armor—essential for survivability in urban environs—and the Israeli Trophy arrival protection system, which operates on the tank in tandem to integrate improved explosive device (IED) protection, as well as other upgrades.
In the case of the Taiwanese M1s, reportedly features a redesigned turret and other modifications that enhance survivability, as well as a datalink for ammunition, facilitating the use of programmable ammunition. Remarkably, the last tanks sent by the United States to Taiwan were the M60A3 tanks, a comparatively old tank now outclassed by virtually all other armored tanks.
Criticisms
One of the perennial drawbacks of the Abrams that is often mentioned is its weight and fuel consumption. The Abrams is one of the heaviest main battle tanks that has been put into production. And much of that weight went toward armor protection, an area in which the Abrams excels. However, it is also a very heavy platform, and its high weight places a significant strain on M1 logistics, complicating the chains necessary to keep them fueled and in the fight.
Still, the M1 is no slouch when it comes to firepower: its performance with the United States in the wars in the Middle East as part of the Global War on Terror, and more recently on the battlefields of Ukraine , is a clear demonstration of that platform’s success.
But one of the M1’s significant drawbacks, aside from fuel and associated logistics, is its weight, particularly over loose ground. After fielding the SEPv3 variant, Australia had difficulty conducting operations with the M1, particularly in swampy areas that are endemic in the country’s north — and the Trophy active protection system adds about two and a half tons to the M1’s base weight. However, it is unclear if Taiwanese Abrams will be outfitted with that system.
Postscript
No platform is a panacea—as evidenced by the Abrams tank. Well-armed and armored, yes, but can the main battle tank not only survive but also excel in the kind of urban environments that could define the fighting in Taiwan, should an invasion force manage to secure a foothold on the island?
It is an important question, and one that seems increasingly relevant as time passes. Are heavy armored platforms even the right choice for the defense of a small but extremely mountainous island nation? That debate is far from settled.
About the Author: Caleb Larson
Caleb Larson is an American multiformat journalist based in Berlin, Germany. His work covers the intersection of conflict and society, focusing on American foreign policy and European security. He has reported from Germany, Russia, and the United States. Most recently, he covered the war in Ukraine, reporting extensively on the war’s shifting battle lines from Donbas and writing on the war’s civilian and humanitarian toll. Previously, he worked as a Defense Reporter for POLITICO Europe. You can follow his latest work on X.
