By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following Portugal’s decision to cancel its F-35 order, Canada is re-evaluating its own $19-billion contract with Lockheed Martin, spurred by political tensions with the U.S. and public pressure. Defence Minister Bill Blair has been instructed to explore alternatives, including potentially supplementing the initial 16 ordered F-35s with aircraft from other manufacturers, such as the Saab Gripen, which offers Canadian assembly and intellectual property transfer. This consideration acknowledges the air force’s preference for the F-35 but also examines the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of a mixed fleet. Potential contract penalties for a partial or complete cancellation remain undetermined.
Read the original article here
Canada’s potential reconsideration of its F-35 purchase highlights growing tensions with the United States. The very idea of acquiring weapons from a nation actively challenging Canada’s sovereignty raises serious concerns. Diversifying military capabilities is prudent, and securing a fleet of jets under complete Canadian control is paramount. Regardless of the financial implications, severing the deal could be the most strategic decision.
The notion of a foreign power possessing the ability to remotely disable Canadian aircraft is alarming. This risk alone justifies exploring alternatives. The idea of a “kill switch” embedded within the sophisticated technology purchased from a potentially adversarial nation is deeply unsettling. It undermines trust and jeopardizes national security.
Several alternative aircraft manufacturers offer compelling options. The Swedish Gripen fighter, for example, has been suggested as a strong contender. This Swedish-made aircraft could offer an alternative, potentially along with partnerships for future 6th-generation fighter development within Europe. This would greatly diversify Canada’s defense procurement beyond reliance on the US.
The current situation is prompting a broader reassessment of Canada’s relationship with the United States. The prospect of purchasing weapons from a nation perceived as hostile or unreliable raises serious questions about national security. This distrust is amplified by previous political disagreements and challenges to Canada’s autonomy.
The ongoing debate underscores a deeper concern: Canada’s reliance on foreign military technology. There’s a growing sentiment favoring domestic manufacturing capabilities. Rebuilding Canada’s military-industrial complex, though a long-term endeavor, would enhance both national security and economic independence. This would involve significant investment in infrastructure and skilled labor. Such a move could reignite industries, possibly creating more Canadian jobs in the long run, even if it requires a short-term increase in expenditure.
However, domestic manufacturing is not without its challenges. Canada currently lacks the necessary infrastructure to manufacture advanced weaponry on a large scale. Rebuilding this capacity requires significant government support and a long-term strategy. Furthermore, the existing industrial base is not fully equipped to support the complex nature of fighter jet production.
Concerns extend beyond the F-35 specifically. The larger issue is the strategic dependence on a single supplier, especially one potentially regarded as adversarial. The purchase of any advanced weaponry raises the specter of technological dependency and potential vulnerability. In light of this, it’s a legitimate question to ask whether procuring sophisticated weaponry from any hostile foreign power is wise, irrespective of cost.
Many alternative suppliers exist, from European nations to Asian countries, each presenting unique advantages and disadvantages. Choosing the right partner requires careful consideration of factors such as technological capabilities, cost, maintenance, and geopolitical considerations. The purchase decision has significant implications for Canada’s military posture and foreign policy.
Ultimately, the decision to reconsider the F-35 purchase reflects a growing awareness of the potential risks associated with relying on a single, potentially unreliable supplier for critical defense systems. The desire for greater control, reduced vulnerability, and a more diverse supply chain are driving factors in this reassessment. The debate has exposed the vulnerabilities inherent in a system where a foreign power holds the ability to control Canada’s defense assets. The focus has shifted from cost concerns to a wider strategic analysis of national security. A complete reconsideration of the F-35 purchase, therefore, is not merely a financial decision but one deeply rooted in strategic security considerations.