Key Points and Summary – Prime Minister Mark Carney’s promised September decision on Canada’s F-35 program has slipped, with Defence Minister David McGuinty confirming the review continues.
-Beyond costs and timelines, Ottawa is reconsidering a “mixed fleet” pairing 16 already-purchased F-35s with Saab JAS 39 Gripens, reviving an option the RCAF previously rejected.
U.S. Air Force Maj. Melanie “Mach” Kluesner performs aerial maneuvers during a demonstration at the Oshkosh AirVenture Airshow in Wisconsin, on July 25, 2025. The demonstration highlights the team’s mission to showcase the precision, agility, and combat-relevant capabilities of the F‑35A Lightning II and the professionalism of its Airmen. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Nicholas Rupiper)
-Proponents cite industrial benefits—Saab pledged Canadian assembly—while critics warn of duplicated training, logistics, and sustainment that can drain readiness and budgets.
-The review follows an Auditor General finding that lifecycle costs have surged toward CAD $28B. Carney says the final call will balance military need with domestic economic returns.
Is Carney Playing Games With the F-35 Review?
Canada’s effort to modernize its fighter fleet with Lockheed Martin’s F-35 stealth fighter jet was already in question when newly-appointed Prime Minister Mark Carney announced in March 2025 that he would initiate a review of the existing procurement contract.
That review, however, is falling behind schedule.
Originally promised to conclude by September 21, the review reportedly remains unfinished, despite repeated assurances from both Prime Minister Carney and Defence Minister David McGuinty that a decision would be made by the end of the summer.
The Latest on Canada and F-35
This week, the Department of National Defence confirmed that the review continues as officials weigh both military and industrial considerations. As part of the review, Canada’s F-35 procurement contract, which was signed before Carney took office, is being examined to determine cost projections, capability requirements, and more.
Officials are not only considering costs and timelines, but actively returning to the possibility of a “mixed fleet” of aircraft, whereby a small fleet of 16 F-35s that have already been purchased will fly alongside a different platform built by a competing company.
Royal Navy F-35 Fighter. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
In this case, Canada is reportedly considering JAS 39 Gripens built by Saab.
McGuinty had vowed during an August trip to Warsaw, Poland, that the review would wrap up before autumn – but that deadline has already passed.
Why the Delay?
Analysts have argued that the delay is not necessarily alarming, however. Philippe Lagass of Carleton University told The Canadian Press this week that the review should not be rushed.
“These things are always complicated, there’s a number of different variables that have to be considered, and I would rather the government take the time to arrive at the right answer,” Lagasse said.
Lagasse also suggested that the review was not, in fact, connected to the ongoing trade disputes between Canada and the United States – despite wide speculation that Carney’s decision was, in fact, largely motivated by the immediate trade disputes sparked by U.S. President Donald Trump upon taking office.
“It’s tied to the sovereign capabilities Canada might need to have and whether a mixed fleet would be an option for Canada to consider,” he also said.
What We Know So Far…
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Prime Minister Carney also sought to address concerns about the delayed results of the review, stressing that his government continues to focus on ensuring that Canada’s procurement of military hardware not only serves the Canadian military, but provides domestic industrial benefits.
“The way we were making decisions until this government, often, was, what’s the military requirement? If it fulfils the military requirement then we go with that,” the prime minister said. “You see both in terms of the submarine decision and the F-35 decision, when it comes, will be military requirement plus industrial benefits, how does the entire package benefit our country.”
JAS 39 Gripen In Play for Canada?
The comments could easily be interpreted as a signal that Canada is leaning away from moving forward with a full purchase of 88 F-35s, and could instead be looking to field a mixed fleet of the F-35s already paid for, and dozens more Gripens built by Saab. In 2020, Saab promised to build its Gripen E in Canada if the aircraft was selected as the Royal Canadian Air Force’s next-generation fighter platform. The platform is one of three initially considered by Canada, alongside the Lockheed Martin F-35A and the Boeing Block III Super Hornet.
“If the Gripen is selected . . . Saab is committed to build, support, sustain, enhance and upgrade Canada’s Gripen in Canada by Canadians,” Saab President Micael Johansson said at the time.
That promise could well be the reason why Canada pivots away from the decision to field a fleet of F-35s, despite the fact that it was the Royal Canadian Air force itself that decided against a mixed-fleet to begin with.
JAS 39 Gripen Taking Off. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Rising Costs and Lagging Infrastructure
While it could be argued that Carney’s decision was motivated largely by ongoing and very public disputes with the U.S. president, it’s also worth mentioning that Ottawa’s review of the F-35 procurement deal came only months after the Auditor General reported that Canadian costs had ballooned to nearly $28 billion CAD – up almost 50 percent from earlier projections.
More than just the sticker price of the jets – which is roughly $85 million USD per aircraft – Canada is also facing the prospect of rising infrastructure costs. From secure facilities, advanced IT systems, and maintenance hubs compatible with stealth technology, the cost of a large F-35 fleet could well balloon again.
However, should Canada move ahead with the Gripens, it would inherit the worst of both worlds. Ottawa would still need to pay for all the specialized facilities and sustainment requirements that come with operating the 16 F-35s it has already purchased, even though most major maintenance would take place in the United States. At the same time, it would also face parallel costs for maintaining and upgrading an entirely different platform. In practical terms, this would mean doubling up on training, logistics chains, spare parts, and long-term maintenance contracts.
Why F-35 Might Win…Or Not…
This is why defense officials have previously resisted the idea of a mixed fleet, and why it was rejected by Canada already. While it offers flexibility in theory, by refusing to rely exclusively on U.S.-sourced equipment, it comes with significant operational and financial downsides. For a middle power like Canada, sustaining two advanced fighter types would require resources far beyond the aircraft’s sticker prices. The result could be less money available for other pressing defense priorities, such as Arctic surveillance and naval modernization.
Chief among the complex matters now dragging out the review could be whether Prime Minister Carney believes those additional costs are worth bearing for the sake of splitting with U.S. President Donald Trump.
About the Author:
Jack Buckby is a British author, counter-extremism researcher, and journalist based in New York who writes frequently for National Security Journal. Reporting on the U.K., Europe, and the U.S., he works to analyze and understand left-wing and right-wing radicalization, and reports on Western governments’ approaches to the pressing issues of today. His books and research papers explore these themes and propose pragmatic solutions to our increasingly polarized society. His latest book is The Truth Teller: RFK Jr. and the Case for a Post-Partisan Presidency.
More Military
USS Constellation Was the Workhorse Aircraft Carrier
Aircraft Carrier USS Independence: Summed Up in 4 Words
Russia’s Tu-95MS Bear: Moscow’s B-52 Bomber?
William Finbarr Wilson
September 27, 2025 at 3:35 pm
Notably, Australia has a mixed fleet of F-35s and F-18s (plus EA-18s). They seem to be doing just fine.
But basically, Canada simply can’t trust the USA as a reliable partner militarily or economically. And we certainly can’t have our aircraft’s spare parts 100 per cent controlled by a country as erratic as the USA that muses repeatedly about annexing us… even when our PM is sitting five feet away from the USA’s president!
Pragmatic Thinker
September 27, 2025 at 4:31 pm
Interesting comparison to have the F-35 which flies for around $45,000 usd per flight hour compared to the Gripen E which is closer less then one third the flight hour cost. Gripen E is a much better choice as an interceptor with its armed supercruise capabilities with no special basing requirements. An RCAF Gripen E can be based just about anywhere in Canada where there is one km of good road. GE Aviation in Winnipeg is to handle the engine maintenance.
William Finbarr Wilson
September 27, 2025 at 5:48 pm
agree… basing slow and short-legged F-35s out of just two bases in Canada just doesn’t cover enough territory.
Ramon Dilkie
September 28, 2025 at 7:57 am
The one thing every war has taught us is that diversity in a weapons mix complement is an advantage . Uniform weapons mean a single vulnerability can be exploited against your entire fleet. It is not a bad thing to field multiple kinds of weapon systems to do a similar job .
Andrew O'Neill
September 28, 2025 at 11:49 pm
This is petty politics. We already know that stealth advantages outweigh any advantage of the Gripen, but if you’re going to play politics this long after the fact, with 16 F-35’s already purchased them just do it. You can find a NATO partner to buy the F-35’s already committed to, hopefully at a minor loss, and get the Gripen already. America doesn’t care if we buy 88 F-35’s or not, someone else will surely buy them anyway.
Fred Scribner
September 29, 2025 at 6:11 am
Sell off the 16 Lightnings we paid for already and go with an all Gripen Fleet.