Ottawa is considering canceling its purchase of F-35As in response to trade tensions with Washington and is exploring other options.
The Canadian government is reevaluating its commitment to Lockheed Martin’s F-35A program. The initial purchase of 88 aircraft to replace the CF-18s is being questioned, in a context of diplomatic and industrial tensions between Ottawa and Washington, fueled in particular by Donald Trump’s protectionist measures. Defense Minister Bill Blair has confirmed a possible strategic reorientation, including the option of producing other fighter jets on Canadian soil. This decision comes at a time when the global market for fighter jets is undergoing accelerated reconfiguration, and alternatives such as Saab’s Gripen E could become relevant again. This policy reversal could have direct effects on the national aeronautics industry, on the program costs and on Canada’s strategic autonomy.
Ottawa re-examines the F-35A program: a strategic reorientation
The announcement of a re-examination of the purchase of Lockheed Martin F-35As by Mark Carney’s government marks a major shift in Canadian defense policy. In 2022, Ottawa had signed for 88 aircraft, 16 of which had already been ordered at an estimated cost of 14.2 billion euros (approximately 21.3 billion Canadian dollars), including training, maintenance and associated infrastructure. This commitment was intended to replace the aging CF-18 Hornet fleet, which had been in service since the 1980s.
The initial argument was based on the stealth capability, NATO integration and technological superiority of the F-35A. However, critical feedback on the high maintenance costs, estimated at €38,000 per flight hour on average, fueled internal doubts. Added to this is a strong technological dependence on the United States, making Canada vulnerable to unilateral decisions from Washington, as illustrated by Turkey’s exclusion from the F-35 program in 2018.
By reevaluating this contract, Ottawa is seeking to strengthen its industrial and military sovereignty, while reducing its exposure to American trade tensions. This strategy is part of a context of increased geopolitical polarization, where supply chains linked to military equipment are becoming diplomatic levers.
The Gripen E option: towards industrial relocation to Canada?
The Minister of Defense has mentioned the possibility of local production in collaboration with other manufacturers. The Swedish manufacturer Saab, ousted in 2022 with its Gripen E, is once again a serious alternative. Saab had proposed an industrial co-development partnership, including an assembly line on Canadian territory, with commitments in terms of local economic benefits estimated at 15 billion euros over 25 years.
Technically, the Gripen E has an AESA radar, NATO compatibility and reduced operating costs to around €6,000 per flight hour, almost six times less than the F-35. The Gripen is also recognized for its simplified maintenance and its ability to operate on unprepared runways, which better corresponds to the operational conditions in remote Canadian bases.
This industrial relocation would offer Canada an independent production capacity, while boosting employment in the aerospace and defense sectors. The Canadian industrial base, historically concentrated around Bombardier, CAE and Pratt & Whitney Canada, could find an opportunity for consolidation, especially after the deleterious effects of the Boeing-Bombardier case in 2017.
Industrial and diplomatic consequences of an F-35 withdrawal
A partial or total withdrawal from the F-35 program would have several industrial and diplomatic repercussions. Canada is currently a member of the F-35 consortium, which allows its companies to participate in the program’s international supply chain. In 2023, approximately 110 Canadian companies had F-35-related contracts, with a cumulative volume of 2.6 billion euros. Withdrawing from the program would call these contracts into question.
However, dependence on this consortium also raises questions about the strategic sustainability of this relationship. Precedents show that bilateral tensions can directly affect industrial contracts. The Boeing-Bombardier case is a concrete illustration of this: Boeing had sued Bombardier before the US Department of Commerce, causing a rapid reconfiguration of the C Series program sold to Airbus in 2018, which has since become the A220.
From a diplomatic point of view, a re-examination of the F-35 would be a clear political signal to Washington, at a time when Donald Trump is making more and more statements against traditional allies, and when American protectionist policies are having a direct impact on the industrial chains of its partners. Ottawa could therefore reposition itself as a more autonomous player, by increasing the number of partnerships outside the American sphere (Europe, Asia).
Strategic reflections on sovereignty and power projection
Beyond the choice of aircraft, the debate touches on broader questions about Canada’s ability to preserve strategic autonomy in its defense decisions. The F-35 model involves centralized management of maintenance, software updates and operational capabilities, dependent on the ALIS/ODIN system managed by Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon.
In terms of power projection, Canada has air bases in the Arctic, Manitoba and Alberta, where the operational flexibility of an aircraft such as the Gripen can offer efficiency more suited to its geographical theater. The future of NORAD, the North American air defense command, also depends on compatible but autonomous capability choices. Increasing the number of NATO-compatible platforms without depending on a single supplier is becoming a strategic lever.
Finally, the total cost of ownership of the F-35, over a 30-year life cycle, is estimated at more than 53 billion euros, according to the Department of Defense. This budgetary burden could be redeployed in other defense areas (cyber defense, drones, intelligence), in the event of a change of course.
War Wings Daily is an independant magazine.