COLUMN: Canada Is Gambling Its Sovereignty on a 27-Billion-Bet

Saab is Playing the Economic Independence Card

Sweden didn’t come empty-handed. Saab is offering Canada a package that’s making politicians eager for economic benefits: 72 Gripen-E fighter jets and 6 GlobalEye surveillance aircraft, all backed by a promise to create 12,600 direct and indirect jobs across Canada. The offer includes the construction of factories in Ontario and Quebec, with a Canada-wide network of suppliers. The GlobalEye would be produced in collaboration with Bombardier, whose Global 6500 jets serve as the platform for the surveillance systems. It’s a proposal that transforms a simple military purchase into a national-scale industrial project.

And here, I have to admit, the Swedish offer has a certain appeal. It speaks directly to the hearts of Canadians who are tired of seeing their country treated as an economic vassal of the United States. It promises jobs, technology, and autonomy. It whispers in the ear of a country desperately seeking to assert its sovereignty in the face of an increasingly unpredictable and aggressive neighbor.

When Diplomacy Becomes a Minefield

It’s impossible to discuss this issue without mentioning the elephant in the room: Donald Trump. The U.S. president has turned Canada-U.S. relations into a veritable diplomatic nightmare. Threats of 100% tariffs on Canadian imports, threats to revoke certification for Canadian-made aircraft, and even statements about annexing Canada as the 51st U.S. state. This is no longer diplomacy; it’s institutionalized harassment. In this toxic environment, every military procurement decision becomes a political act laden with symbolism. Buying F-35s means submitting. Choosing the Gripen means defying Washington.

Trump has managed the feat of turning a rational military decision into an existential dilemma. Every time he opens his mouth to threaten Canada, he strengthens the arguments of those who want to turn their backs on the F-35s. It would be almost comical if it weren’t so tragic. The U.S. president is sabotaging the interests of his own defense industry out of sheer arrogance and diplomatic incompetence.

Carney Announces a Shift Toward Europe and China

In January 2026, Mark Carney delivered a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos that sent shockwaves through the audience. In his address, the Canadian Prime Minister lamented the decline of American hegemony and called for a new era in which China would play a preeminent role on the world stage. This radical geopolitical shift suggests that Canada may seek to distance itself from its traditional U.S. ally in order to draw closer to European and Asian partners. Within this new paradigm, purchasing Swedish fighter jets rather than American ones would make perfect sense as a strong political signal.

This statement left me speechless. Carney has essentially just told the world that Canada no longer considers the United States its primary ally. This is a tectonic shift in Canadian foreign policy, a historic break that will have consequences for decades to come. And the choice between the F-35 and the Gripen suddenly becomes much more than a simple military procurement decision—it is a referendum on the country’s geopolitical future.

Polls Show Overwhelming Rejection of the F-35

An Ekos poll conducted between November and December 2025 reveals a dramatic shift in Canadian public opinion. Only 13% of Canadians support purchasing a fleet consisting solely of F-35s, while 43% prefer a fleet consisting exclusively of Gripens and 29% favor a mixed fleet. Regional variations are striking: in Quebec and British Columbia, support for the F-35 drops to just 9%, while it reaches 18% in Alberta. Rejection of the F-35 is particularly pronounced among NDP voters (60% in favor of the Gripen) and Liberal Party voters (51% in favor of the Gripen).

These figures send a chill down my spine. Not because they reveal a rejection of the F-35 per se, but because they show just how much national defense decisions have become hostage to public opinion and short-term political calculations. A country’s defense should not be decided by opinion polls. It should be based on strategic analyses, actual military capabilities, and identified threats. But we live in an era where emotion takes precedence over reason.

Interoperability with NORAD at Risk

Defense experts are sounding the alarm about the consequences of a mixed fleet or a complete abandonment of the F-35. Philippe Lagassé, a professor at Carleton University’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, emphasizes that Canada cannot afford to have only 16 F-35s from a military standpoint. U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra has warned that NORAD would have to be reconfigured if Canada no longer ensures full interoperability with U.S. systems. The Gripen, while capable, does not offer the same level of integration with North American defense systems as the F-35.

This is where we stand: caught between national pride and strategic reality. Yes, the Gripen is an excellent aircraft. Yes, the Swedish offer is generous. But can we really afford to compromise our integration with NORAD at a time when geopolitical tensions are reaching historic highs? That is the question that haunts me—and one that should haunt every Canadian.

Who Really Controls Canada’s F-35s

One of the strongest arguments against the F-35 concerns technological dependence on the United States. Although Lockheed Martin vigorously denies the existence of a “kill switch” that could remotely disable the aircraft, several experts point out that the United States controls software updates and access to spare parts. This dependence could theoretically allow Washington to paralyze the Canadian fleet in the event of a major political disagreement. The Gripen, on the other hand, would offer greater operational autonomy and national control over maintenance and upgrades.

This issue of technological sovereignty really gnaws at me. Imagine for a moment: Canada buys 88 F-35s for 27 billion, and in ten years, during a trade or political dispute, the United States decides to cut off access to critical updates. Our planes would become flying paperweights weighing several metric tons. It’s a nightmarish scenario, but is it really that unlikely in the Trump era?

Can Saab Really Deliver on Its Commitments?

Saab’s promise of 12,600 jobs is under close scrutiny by industry experts. To fulfill this promise, Canada would not only have to purchase the 72 Gripen fighters and 6 GlobalEye aircraft for its own needs, but Saab would also have to succeed in transforming Canada into a production hub for international exports. Ukraine has expressed interest in more than 100 Gripen aircraft, while France and Germany are potential customers for the GlobalEye. But these export contracts remain hypothetical. For its part, Lockheed Martin is promising $15 billion in economic spinoffs if Canada maintains its full order of 88 F-35s.

The promises of jobs—it’s always the same old story. They’re selling us a dream—sparkling factories, thousands of skilled workers. But how many of these promises have actually come true in the past? How many industrial projects have ended up as empty shells? I want to believe Saab. I want to believe that these 12,600 jobs are real. But the skeptic in me refuses to let my guard down.

The moment of truth is approaching

Canada now faces a choice that goes far beyond the mere acquisition of fighter jets. It is a societal choice, a geopolitical choice—a choice that will define the country’s place on the world stage for decades to come. Mark Carney can continue to stall, commission additional studies, and weigh each option with excessive caution. But sooner or later, he will have to make a decision. The first 16 F-35s will arrive this year, and the question of the remaining 72 aircraft cannot remain unresolved indefinitely. Between the technological sovereignty promised by Sweden and the strategic interoperability guaranteed by the United States, between jobs and national security, Canada must choose a side.

I don’t know what decision Carney will ultimately make. Perhaps he’ll opt for a mixed fleet—that shaky compromise that will satisfy no one. Perhaps he’ll yield to American pressure and order all 88 F-35s. Perhaps he’ll have the courage to cancel the whole thing and bet on the Gripen. What I do know is that this decision terrifies me. Because it will be made against a backdrop of extreme geopolitical tensions, under pressure from an unpredictable U.S. president, with a divided public and experts who contradict one another. And in the end, it is ordinary Canadians who will have to live with the consequences of this choice for the next 40 years. We deserve better than this chronic indecision. We deserve leadership that dares to make decisions, that takes responsibility, that faces the future head-on rather than hiding behind committees and endless reviews. The time for procrastination is over. The moment of truth has arrived.

Signed, Jacques Provost