Canada May Scale Back F-35 Order and Buy 60 Swedish Gripen Fighters

35,000+ smart investors are already getting financial news, market signals, and macro shifts in the economy that could impact their money next with our FREE weekly newsletter. Get ahead of what the crowd finds out too late. Click Here to Subscribe for FREE.

Canada’s fighter-jet debate has moved from a long-running procurement file to a broader question about sovereignty, cost, and who Ottawa wants to rely on in a more unpredictable world. The country’s plan to buy 88 F-35A fighters from Lockheed Martin remains officially in place, but recent reporting suggests the federal government is weighing a major shift: keeping a smaller number of F-35s while adding roughly 60 Swedish-built Saab Gripen fighters.

The idea has landed at a sensitive moment. Canada is trying to modernize an aging air force, strengthen Arctic defence, satisfy allies, and create more domestic industrial benefits from military spending. What once looked like a settled decision has become a test of whether Ottawa still sees U.S. defence procurement as the safest path — or whether a more diversified approach now looks politically and strategically necessary.

Why Ottawa Is Revisiting a Deal It Already Chose

Canada officially confirmed in January 2023 that it would buy the F-35A, ending years of political back-and-forth over how to replace the Royal Canadian Air Force’s aging CF-18 fleet. The deal was framed as the most significant investment in the air force in more than three decades, covering not only aircraft but also training, infrastructure, sustainment, software support, and related equipment. At the time, the F-35 appeared to offer the clearest route to a modern fighter fleet aligned with Canada’s NORAD and NATO commitments.

But the political environment has changed sharply since then. Prime Minister Mark Carney ordered a review of the F-35 purchase in 2025, with officials citing the need to examine whether the contract remained the best investment for Canada. Defence Minister David McGuinty later confirmed the review was still ongoing, saying other aircraft from other countries were part of the discussion. That made the fighter decision less about a single aircraft and more about whether Canada should reduce its dependence on one foreign defence supplier.

The 60-Gripen Scenario Is Still a Reported Option, Not a Final Decision

The most attention-grabbing version of the new plan would see Canada reduce its F-35 purchase from 88 aircraft to roughly 30, while buying about 60 Saab Gripen fighters from Sweden. Recent reports have attributed that possibility to Canadian media coverage, describing it as a serious option under consideration rather than a finalized government decision. That distinction matters because Ottawa has not formally announced a cancellation, replacement, or split-fleet plan.

For readers following the file, the key point is that the reported numbers are specific enough to shape the debate. A move from 88 F-35s to a smaller F-35 fleet plus Gripens would mark one of the largest shifts in Canadian combat aviation planning since the F-35 was selected. It would also send a strong signal that Ottawa is willing to reopen major procurement decisions when cost, industrial benefits, and geopolitics change. Until cabinet makes a formal announcement, however, the 60-Gripen scenario remains a reported possibility — not a confirmed purchase.

Costs Have Become the Hardest Part of the Debate

The F-35 program has faced growing scrutiny because the price tag has continued to rise. Canada initially announced a $19-billion acquisition plan, but the Parliamentary Budget Officer later estimated the full life-cycle cost of the F-35 program at $73.9 billion. That estimate included acquisition, operations, sustainment, development, and disposal costs over the long term. For taxpayers, the difference between the sticker price and the long-term ownership cost is where the debate becomes much more complicated.

The Auditor General also warned that Canada’s fighter transition project was facing significant cost increases and delays. Reuters reported that the final bill could rise well above the original acquisition estimate, with concerns including foreign exchange pressure, facility costs, and readiness risks. This is the kind of issue that makes defence procurement difficult to explain at a kitchen table. Buying the aircraft is only the beginning. Training crews, building facilities, maintaining the fleet, and keeping aircraft ready for decades can become the larger and more politically painful expense.

The First 16 F-35s Make a Full Reversal More Complicated

Even if Ottawa wanted to dramatically change course, the F-35 deal is not a blank sheet of paper. Canada has already made a legal commitment of funds for the first 16 aircraft. That means the realistic debate is not simply “F-35 or no F-35.” It is more likely a question of how many F-35s Canada ultimately takes, whether the remaining order is adjusted, and whether another aircraft is added to the fleet.

That first tranche also gives the issue a practical political dimension. Cancelling everything would be more disruptive than reshaping the remaining portion of the plan. A smaller F-35 fleet could allow Canada to preserve some continuity with allies while still moving part of future procurement toward Europe. For Ottawa, the challenge is to avoid looking indecisive after years of delays while also showing that it is protecting taxpayers, strengthening domestic industry, and responding to changing relations with Washington.

Saab’s Pitch Is About Canadian Work, Not Just Aircraft

Saab’s Gripen pitch has gained attention because it is tied to Canadian industrial benefits. The company has said that Gripen and GlobalEye production in Canada could support more than 12,000 jobs if production were localized. The Associated Press has also reported that Saab’s proposal included assembly and maintenance of the Gripen fighter jet in Canada. That makes the offer politically attractive because it connects defence spending to jobs, aerospace capability, and long-term domestic control.

This matters because Canadians often judge large military purchases by more than military requirements alone. A fighter-jet contract can become a regional economic story, especially in places with aerospace expertise and existing supply chains. If part of the work is done in Canada, the sale becomes easier to defend as an investment rather than just an expense. The risk is that job claims attached to defence bids can depend heavily on final contract terms, production volumes, export opportunities, and how much work is truly transferred to Canadian firms.

The GlobalEye Decision Gave Sweden New Momentum

The Gripen debate has also been shaped by Canada’s recent move toward Saab’s GlobalEye early-warning aircraft. Ottawa announced plans to buy Swedish Saab surveillance aircraft built on the Canadian-made Bombardier Global 6500 platform, choosing that route over U.S. alternatives. Prime Minister Carney presented the decision as part of a broader push to strengthen Arctic defence and reduce overreliance on American suppliers.

That decision does not automatically mean Canada will buy Gripen fighters, but it changes the atmosphere around the fighter review. It shows that the federal government is willing to pick a Swedish defence solution when it sees industrial and strategic benefits. It also gives Sweden a stronger foothold in Canada’s defence modernization plans. For Saab, GlobalEye is proof that a Swedish-Canadian aerospace partnership can be framed as both a security decision and a jobs decision. For Lockheed Martin, it raises the pressure to make the F-35 package more compelling to Ottawa.

A Mixed Fleet Would Add Procurement Complexity

A split between F-35s and Gripens could give Ottawa a political compromise, but it would not be simple. Operating two fighter types means Canada would likely need to manage separate training systems, maintenance arrangements, supply chains, software updates, and long-term support plans. That can increase complexity for a military already facing pressure to modernize quickly after years of delay.

The argument in favour of a mixed fleet is that Canada could reduce dependence on a single supplier while keeping some access to the F-35 program. The argument against it is that smaller fleets can become harder and more expensive to sustain, especially for a country with vast geography and limited personnel. For pilots, technicians, and base planners, procurement decisions made in Ottawa eventually become daily operational realities. A split fleet may sound elegant on paper, but the long-term details would decide whether it strengthens or complicates Canada’s air force.

The Bigger Question Is Who Canada Wants to Depend On

The fighter-jet review is happening inside a much larger shift in Canadian foreign and defence policy. Carney has argued that Canada must diversify military procurement and reduce reliance on the United States. Canada has also joined a major European Union defence financing initiative, becoming the first non-EU country to gain access to the SAFE program. That move fits with a broader strategy of deepening defence ties with Europe while keeping the U.S. relationship intact.

That is why the F-35 versus Gripen debate has become bigger than aircraft numbers. It touches trade tensions, Arctic sovereignty, industrial policy, alliance politics, and public trust in procurement. Canada still needs a credible fighter replacement, and the F-35 deal has not been cancelled. But the fact that a 60-Gripen option is being seriously discussed shows how much the ground has shifted. Ottawa’s final decision will reveal whether Canada still sees the F-35 as the backbone of its future fighter fleet — or whether the next era of Canadian defence procurement will be deliberately less American.

This Options Discord Chat is The Real Deal

While the internet is scoured with trading chat rooms, many of which even charge upwards of thousands of dollars to join, this smaller options trading discord chatroom is the real deal and actually providing valuable trade setups, education, and community without the noise and spam of the larger more expensive rooms. With a incredibly low-cost monthly fee, Options Trading Club (click here to see their reviews) requires an application to join ensuring that every member is dedicated and serious about taking their trading to the next level. If you are looking for a change in your trading strategies, then click here to apply for a membership.