Defence leaders rally behind the F-35 plan
Former senior officers of the Canadian Armed Forces are stepping into the public arena to defend Ottawa’s controversial plan to acquire 88 American F-35 fighter jets. The unified stance from ex-service personnel aims to counter mounting critiques tied to the government’s ongoing discussions with the Swedish aerospace firm Saab, which has pitched alternatives and partners for Canada’s next generation of air power. The debate touches on strategic necessity, cost, interoperability with North American allies, and Canada’s broader defence industrial policy.
Context: Why the F-35 has become a flashpoint
Canada’s pursuit of advanced fighter capability has long been tied to a preference for interoperability with allied forces, particularly the United States. The F-35 is widely seen by defence planners as a next-generation platform capable of suppressing air defenses, delivering precision munitions, and functioning within joint deployment scenarios. Critics, however, argue that the plan could lock Canada into a single supplier pathway and overlook viable, potentially less expensive alternatives offered by Saab or other manufacturers.
Sweden’s Saab approach and the ongoing courtship
The Swedish firm Saab has framed its offer as a comprehensive ecosystem for air power, emphasizing cost controls, industrial partnerships, and technology transfer opportunities. Ottawa has invited competition and is reviewing Saab’s proposal alongside others as part of a formal procurement process. The current discourse suggests a tug-of-war between maintaining a traditional, trusted American platform and exploring Saab’s alternative vision for Canada’s future fighters. Defence officials insist the Saab option remains in contention, but the final decision will hinge on performance, lifecycle costs, and strategic fit with Canada’s defence priorities.
What the 88-aircraft plan means for Canada
Proponents of the F-35 argue the purchase aligns with Canada’s long-term security objectives and NATO commitments, ensuring Canada can operate seamlessly with allies in joint missions and exercises. Opponents raise concerns about total cost of ownership, the pace of readiness, and the potential for dependence on a single supplier. The 88 aircraft figure is also a topic of public scrutiny, as analysts weigh whether the scale matches Canada’s defence needs, geography, and anticipated threats. The ex-officer coalition suggests that the plan is not merely a budget line item but a strategic decision with implications for industrial policy, maintenance ecosystems, and regional defence capacity.
Implications for country’s defence policy and industry
Beyond immediate military capability, the choice will influence Canada’s defence-industrial base, including potential partnerships with North American suppliers and opportunities for domestic job creation through long-term maintenance and upgrades. Critics worry about potential lock-in effects if a preferred platform dominates procurement for decades, while supporters emphasize predictability in planning, training, and interoperability. The debate also intersects with Canada’s broader strategy on resilience, cyber and space domains, and how swiftly the country can adapt to evolving threats while maintaining a credible deterrent posture.
What comes next
The political process continues as Parliament and defence committees scrutinize the procurement path, accounting for cost, capability, and strategic risk. As the 88-F-35 plan advances through the required reviews, defence veterans hope to persuade policymakers that national security, alliance credibility, and industrial benefits justify the preferred option. Whether Saab’s alternative or the American F-35 secures the final approval, Canadians can expect a rigorous public conversation about how best to modernize the country’s air power for the coming decades.
