Leo1 has very little armour and no protection from even the most primitive Russian AT weapons. The reason the Leo2 was introduced was that the Leo1 did not measure up to the T-72, the very tank the Russians are using in Ukraine. I'd rather we send Ukraine the Leo2s they asked for. As I understand it, it's politics, not a lack of availability that is holding up the Leo2s for Ukraine.
If there's any European tank that's not in front line service today to send, it has to be those four hundred Challenger 1 tanks that Jordan is retiring. Let's collect those now, today, clean them up, and send those to Ukraine.... alongside three hundred Leo2s.
Rheinmetall is ready to buy Jordanian Challenger 1 tanks, bring them to Germany, refurbish and repair them, and send them to help Ukrainian ground forces.
bulgarianmilitary.com
Even Canada, one of the most parsimonious military spenders in NATO scrapped their Leo1s for Leo2s a decade ago. Sending Leo1s to Ukraine when Leo2s are available is just setting up the UAF for failure and sending Ukrainians to unnecessary death.
I wish NATO would decide how they want to help Ukraine. On one hand we send the highest tech kit, such as HIMARs, GMLRS, MANPADS, MANPATS, Patriot SAMs, MQ-9 Reaper drones, and other top drawer systems. Then on the other hand we treat Ukraine like a dump for army surplus junk, like Leo1s and retired Sea Kings first produced in the 1960s.