Summary and Key Points: Amid growing political tensions with the U.S., Canada is reconsidering its planned purchase of 88 F-35 stealth fighters, potentially turning instead to Sweden’s Saab JAS 39 Gripen.
-Although Canada already committed funds for 16 F-35s, Prime Minister Mark Carney tasked Defense Minister Bill Blair to evaluate alternative aircraft to reduce reliance on America.
-While the Gripen offers lower costs, local production opportunities, and easier logistics, it lacks the F-35’s stealth and advanced fifth-generation capabilities, vital for protecting Canada’s expansive Arctic territory.
-Shifting to the Gripen would create logistical challenges and could weaken Canada’s strategic defense posture against modern threats.
Canada Might Drop the F-35 for Saab Gripen: A Smart Move or Big Mistake?
Tensions between the US and Canada over President Trump’s tariffs and continuing to call Canada the 51st state have led the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney, to tell the new Defense Minister, Bill Blair, to look for alternatives to the American F-35 for future purchase, and perhaps go to the Saab JAS 39 Gripen.
The Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) is seeking to purchase 88 new fighters to replace its aging fleet of CF-18s, the local designation for the Boeing F/A-18 Hornet.
Ottawa had announced its preference for the F-35A in late March 2022.
The contract is for $13 billion. But now, that contract may be in jeopardy.
Canada Reconsidering The F-35 Lightning II for JAS 39 Gripen
“At this time, the contract to purchase the F-35 remains in place, and Canada has made a legal commitment of funds for the first 16 aircraft. The Prime Minister has also asked the Minister of National Defence to work with CAF/DND [Canadian Armed Forces/Department of National Defence] to determine if the F-35 contract, as it stands, is the best investment for Canada. If there are other options that could better meet Canada’s needs,” Laurent de Casanove, press secretary for Canadian defense minister Bill Blair, said in a statement to Breaking Defense.
“To be clear, we are not canceling the F-35 contract, but we need to do our homework given the changing environment and make sure that the contract in its current form is in the best interests of Canadians and the Canadian Armed Forces,” de Casanove added.
Portugal has already decided to reconsider moving on from the F-35, and now Canada may follow suit. The JAS 39 Gripen is an outstanding fourth-generation fighter aircraft that lost to the F-35 in Canada and other countries.
The fifth generation F-35 Lightning II is now in service in 21 countries, including the US.
“Canada is actively looking at potential alternatives to the U.S.-built F-35 stealth fighter and will hold conversations with rival aircraft makers,” Defence Minister Bill Blair said just hours after being announced as the next Canadian Defense Minister on Friday.
Since Canada had already paid for the first 16 F-35s, Blair hinted that Canada could diversify the Canadian Air Force by adding European fighters so that the country’s defense would not be so reliant on the United States.
The most likely candidate is the JAS 39 Gripen, which the F-35 bested in the competition for the Canadian contract. While this scenario sounds feasible, it would create a logistical and organizational nightmare, significantly increasing infrastructure, training, and supply chain management costs.
Sweden has offered to assemble Gripens in Canada and transfer intellectual property, something the F-35 program does not permit. International F-35 operators (except Israel) “are not allowed to conduct independent test operations outside of the Continental United States (CONUS) based on US policy. United States Government (USG) security rules and National Defense Policy (NDP) require that US citizens perform specific functions to protect critical US technology,” the US Air Force website says.
Germany interpreted this rule to mean that the F-35 had a “kill switch,” which is a total fabrication.
Comparing The F-35 to the JAS 39
The Gripen is considered one of the best non-stealth combat aircraft in the world. Yet Saab has largely failed to secure additional sales for its fighters, while international sales campaigns have scored no successes since Brazil joined the Gripen E/F program in 2014.
Why? Most countries are opting for the F-35 Lightning II.
Many people frequently compare the two fighters, but there isn’t much comparison. Saab offers maintenance contracts and upgrades to keep the aircraft flying until 2035.
The F-35 is considered the most advanced aircraft in the world. It is now in service with 21 countries, including the United States, and because of its familiarity, it seamlessly integrates with NATO countries.
The bottom line is that the F-35 is an actual fifth-generation multirole aircraft with stealth capabilities. At the same time, the Gripen is still just an advanced fourth-generation fighter—a very good fourth-generation aircraft but not a fifth-generation stealth aircraft.
The F-35 is a significantly larger aircraft but slightly slower than the Gripen. Though the JAS 39 has a more extended range than the Lightning II, each can carry a similar weapons load—although the F-35 can operate in stealth mode.
Canada opted for the F-35 for a reason. It is a better aircraft than the Gripen. Yes, it is more expensive and more so to maintain, but the F-35’s stealth capability is precisely what Canada needs to protect its vast Arctic domain, which enemies want.
If Canada opts to terminate the F-35 contract, they won’t hurt Trump but their national defense.
About the Author and Expertise of Writer
Steve Balestrieri is a 19FortyFive National Security Columnist. He served as a US Army Special Forces NCO and Warrant Officer. In addition to writing for 19FortyFive, he covers the NFL for PatsFans.com and is a member of the Pro Football Writers of America (PFWA). His work was regularly featured in many military publications.
Ryan M
April 20, 2025 at 11:16 am
More Lockheed Martin shilling.
This publication is a lot of American and Canadian Cons trying to keep Canada weak.
Who cares if the F35 is etter. It cost mpre to buy. Way more to fly and loses it’s stealth as soon as it carries external stores. It relies on network centric warfare elememts which Canada does not own.
It provides zero autonomy. Canada will be fighting alongside Western Europe. America is now a vassal state of Russia.
Michael
April 20, 2025 at 11:52 am
From their new sales pitch:
”F35 – the most advanced plane on the ground”
Skip
April 20, 2025 at 1:36 pm
Never underestimate the depth of Canuck Stupidity.
Proof point: they dumped the EH101 Cormorant program, and then went and bought the same quantity of the same damn airframe under 2 other designations for nearly 2x the cost.
Course, wtf would *I* know. I was merely an RCAF pilot at the time, working at 1CAD/CANR.
Cameron Roth
April 20, 2025 at 2:21 pm
The cost difference alone should be the deciding factor. Both procurement and operating costs are substantially lower for the gripen.
The fact alone that the Gripen was designed to operate in a remote arctic environment should be enough reason to consider.
Paul Ruffolo
April 20, 2025 at 3:02 pm
Canada doesn’t need stealth fighters to patrol it’s Arctic territory. More drones and surveillance aircraft like the Saab GlobalEye.
The F-35 II has a low mission capable rate and 10x more expensive to operate than the Saab Gripen E. Plus, they require more maintenance and runways of a length that don’t exist in Canada’s Arctic.
Given the current US administration’s hostility towards Canada, cancelling the remaining units makes sense. Sell the 16 to someone with US approval.
Delivery of the Gripen can start from factories in Sweden and Brazil until Canada can start building it own.
John G
April 20, 2025 at 3:56 pm
You’re missing the point, Steve. Canada would love to take the F-35. But your President has made unthinkable public ambitions of annexing Canada. As such, Canada is forced to rethink its reliance on US made defence products.
The F-35 is heavily reliant on parts support and constant software updates from Lockheed Martin. You can cripple the fleet without a “kill switch”.
From America - You’re Welcome
April 20, 2025 at 4:43 pm
Ryan M – Without the US, both Canada and Western Europe would currently be speaking Russian. Never forget that.
Ulf Samuelsson
April 20, 2025 at 5:45 pm
The Ukrainan Air Force now operates both the F-16 and the Mirage 2000 and are not complaining. Gripen and F-35 can use the same type of weapons. The Gripen can also use the more advanced Meteor missile which only will be qualified for the F-35B.
The current plan for the F-35 is to base them no further north than Cold Lake which is 2000 km south of Northern Canada. It will take several hours of flying with tanker support to reach the north. Gripen can operate from up to 27 different airports in the Northern Territories because it only requires an 800 meter runway, instead of a 2133 meter (7,000 feet) runway for the F-35. The cost of handling an incursion from Cold Lake can easily be 10-20 x more expensive than handling an incursion from Inuvik and a real attacker will have several hours more to launch cruise missiles. If the F-35 tankers are shot down, the F-35 will crash, out of fuel.
F-35s cannot maintain stealth capabilities on a roadbase. Denmark had to upgrade their most advanced F-16 fighter base for $190M to support F-35 operation. Both Denmark and Norway will limit F-35 operations to a single base.
SAAB sold additional Gripens to Hungary 1-2 years ago. Sweden also extended the Czech leasing contract to 2035. Both Colombia and Thailand announced that they selected Gripen E, and the Philippines seems to be leaning towards Gripen, although they have no budget.
The Swedish Government needs to approve all sales of Gripen, and they do not allow Gripen to be sold to the Middle East. They also told Pakistan that it was out of the question to sell Gripen. SAAB is allowed to sell GlobalEye and similar stuff, as they are considered strictly defensive.
Comparing Gripen exports (outside the ME) to other aircraft like Eurofighter, Rafale, F-15, F/A-18 shows that it is winning as many tenders as the others.
All devices which support upgrading the software can get a kill switch installed in the next upgrade. Unless you have access to the source code, you have no way of verifying the existence or non-existence of a kill switch.
The main problem with the F-35 is that it does not work. All F-35s produced since July 2023 has a bunch of new hardware. The Tech Refresh 3. The new hardware is not complete, suffers from glitches, and requires Block 4 software.
It is not approved for combat. The USAF stopped accepting new F-35s for a year, and then made an agreement with Lockheed Martin that they can deliver aircraft, but not at the full price, since the software only really allows the aircraft to fly, but not engage in combat.
The F-35 that perform combat missions are with the Tech Refresh 2 hardware and Block 3F software. Lockheed Martin is not delivering this to new customers like Canada.
The Block 4 should have been available in April 2023, but since 2022, the Block 4 software is one year away. To simplify development, the Block 4 will be available in partial deliveries. 4.2, 4.2, 4.3 etc. The US Congress believes that the Block 4 development will not be ready until well into the 2030s.
Randy Moulton
April 20, 2025 at 6:04 pm
This is the same guy saying the same rhetoric
Joseph
April 20, 2025 at 6:54 pm
Sorry guys and girls: I like the French fighter first, Euro, then the Saab. F35 comes with too many Trump foibles.
Tim Forsyth
April 20, 2025 at 11:18 pm
I think the writers credentials speak for themselves and his country and what he says doesn’t relate at all to what Canada needs,
especially now.
D
April 20, 2025 at 11:52 pm
Why, exactly, does Canada NEED a stealth fighter to patrol the Arctic?
Richard C.
April 21, 2025 at 6:10 am
Ulf and some of the other posters have succinctly summarized why Canada. MUST NOT buy the f-35. The many defects if this aircraft limit its effectiveness even years after it entered service. Also, the article author, Steve, made several false statements; principally the claim that stealth is essential for protecting the Arctic. The “stealth” of the F-35 is overrated, plus it can’t even reach the Arctic without support from tanker aircraft (which are as stealthy as a flying office building.). Hanging external fuel tanks or weapons destroys the “stealth” (such as it is) of the f-35. The Gripen is eminently more suited to Canada’s north, is faster, has more range, costs less, and most importantly, has FAR lower maintenance costs than the F-35, which, outrageously, the US insists on building IN the US, and then we would have to fly them down there for routine maintenance!!! With “friends” like the US, we don’t need enemies. Gripen has FAR lower maintenance costs and lends itself to a dispersed fighter force which we will need, given the size of the country.
Combining all these facts with the dangerously unstable character of trump and his repeated threats to invade and annex our country, buying the F-35 is national suicide. I understand that you are a big booster of US technology(how much is lockheed paying you?), but this is the second article in a week I’ve seen in the same vein from you, and it really is NOT working. If you want to bullsh#t us, at least try to come up with something remotely plausible.
Michael
April 21, 2025 at 3:32 pm
Richard C,
You hit the nail there with ”dispersed road bases”. Big country to patrol.
”Moviemento es vida” as Brad Pitt said in World War Z