Tensions between the United States and its NATO allies are now putting a major military project at risk—the purchase of F 35 fighter jets. Several NATO countries, including Portugal, Canada, and Germany, are reconsidering their plans to buy these advanced warplanes. The main reasons behind this shift include political disagreements, cost concerns, and fears about the U.S. controlling critical aircraft systems.
Growing Concerns Over NATO’s F 35 Plans
The F-35 is a highly advanced fighter jet designed to serve multiple roles in combat. It is used by the U.S. military and 19 allied nations, including non-NATO countries such as South Korea, Japan, Australia, and Israel. Many NATO members planned to replace their aging aircraft with F-35s to maintain a strong and unified air force. However, recent political tensions and doubts about reliability have led some countries to rethink their decisions.
Portugal’s defense minister recently pointed out that the “recent U.S. stance in the context of NATO” is making officials reconsider replacing 28 F-16 fighter jets with F-35 Lightning IIs. In Canada, newly elected Prime Minister Mark Carney has ordered a review of the country’s decision to purchase 88 F-35s, a deal worth over $13 billion. Germany’s plan to buy 35 F-35s is also now uncertain.
The Strengths and Weaknesses of the F-35
The F 35 was created as part of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program, which aimed to develop a high-tech aircraft for NATO and U.S. allies. It has three different versions to meet the needs of air forces, navies, and marines. The jet features stealth technology, powerful sensors, and advanced radar systems that make it capable of air-to-air combat, ground attacks, and intelligence gathering. Despite its impressive features, the F-35 has faced years of technical problems and cost overruns.
Why Portugal’s Controversial Exit from the F-35 Deal Raises NATO Concerns
Military experts argue that the F-35 is one of the most capable fighter jets in the world. Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace expert, describes it as a “really good plane” with strong stealth capabilities. He warns that if NATO abandons the F 35, it will lose a key advantage in air combat.
One major benefit of using the same aircraft across NATO is improved coordination. A shared fighter jet means easier pilot training, better maintenance support, and the ability to swap spare parts between countries. Former U.S. Congressman Mac Thornberry, who supported the F-35 program, says that dropping the aircraft could weaken NATO’s unity, something that rivals of the alliance would welcome.
However, some countries are now looking at alternative fighter jets, such as the Swedish Saab JAS-39 Gripen. The Gripen is not as stealthy as the F 35, but it is faster, has a longer range, and is much cheaper to operate. Unlike the F 35, it does not rely heavily on U.S. support and software systems, which is an advantage for countries concerned about U.S. political decisions affecting their military equipment.
China’s Veiled Warning to US; WZ-9 Drone Could Detect F-35 and B-21
Distrust Over U.S. Control and Costs
A major reason why some NATO members are reconsidering the F 35 is the fear that the U.S. has too much control over the aircraft. European media outlets have reported concerns about a possible “kill switch” that could allow the U.S. to disable the jets remotely. Although defense officials have denied these claims, the rumors highlight a growing lack of trust between NATO allies and the U.S.
Belgium’s chief of defense, Gen. Frederik Vansina, and Switzerland’s defense department have both rejected the idea that the F 35 can be remotely disabled. However, some European leaders worry that in a future conflict, the U.S. could stop providing spare parts and software updates, making the jets useless. Given the perception that the U.S. is not fully committed to NATO, these concerns have become more serious.
British F-35B Jets Bolster NATO Air Defense in Iceland
Additionally, the cost of the F-35 program has raised eyebrows worldwide. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimates that the F 35 will cost the U.S. over $2 trillion throughout its lifetime. Critics argue that the fighter jet is too expensive and overly complex. On social media, tech billionaire Elon Musk has criticized the F-35, calling it an “expensive and complex jack of all trades, master of none.” He believes that drone swarms could replace manned fighter jets, although military experts disagree.
Some U.S. lawmakers have also questioned the program’s costs. Washington Democratic Rep. Adam Smith, a key member of the House Armed Services Committee, has called the F-35 overpriced and inefficient. “You really hate to wind up overpaying for mediocrity, but you kind of got to have one,” he says, comparing it to an NFL quarterback who receives excessive compensation.
Israel’s Long-Range Strike: The F-35 Adir’s Latest Mission
Meanwhile, U.S. military officials are also reevaluating the country’s own F-35 purchases. Seth Jones, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), says that some believe the future of air combat lies in unmanned and autonomous aircraft, not expensive fighter jets.
Even with its flaws, the F-35 remains one of the most advanced warplanes in the world. It can operate in heavily defended airspace, collect intelligence, and launch powerful weapons, including nuclear missiles. Losing the F-35’s capabilities would make it harder for NATO countries to work together in future military operations. However, if European nations decide to invest in their own defense industries, they may prefer to buy jets from European manufacturers instead of depending on the U.S.
