The United States has dismissed growing fears about Kill Switch that it can remotely disable the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter, following concerns from multiple countries about a potential “kill switch” embedded in the aircraft’s system.
The Pentagon’s Joint Program Office (JPO) issued a strong denial, stating, “There is no kill switch.” The clarification comes amid rising skepticism from Germany, Canada, and Portugal, with some nations reconsidering their F-35 purchases due to fears that the U.S. could control or disable the jets in case of diplomatic conflicts.
Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer of the F-35, echoed the Pentagon’s stance. The company emphasized its commitment to empowering customers with full operational control over their aircraft. A statement from Lockheed Martin highlighted that the F-35 program “is built on strong partnerships with U.S. allies and partner nations across the globe.
Kill Switch Fears Shake Buyer Confidence
There have been a lot of concerns about the Kill Switch in the F-35 and that the Superjet has become $2 Trillion blunder.
Read More About the Regtechtimes Report on F-35 Fighter Jets
Concerns over U.S. control first surfaced in Germany, where security experts warned that Washington could shut down the Luftwaffe’s F-35s during a dispute.
German security experts first raised concerns, wondering if the U.S. government could disable Germany’s F-35s during a disagreement. This rumor spread quickly, making Portugal reconsider buying the jets and Canada rethink its F-35 deal. Some reports even suggested that the U.S. could block spare parts or software updates, making the jets useless over time.
Following these reports, Portugal pulled back from its F-35 deal, and Canada is reviewing its order of 88 jets, worth CAD 19 billion (US$13.27 billion).
Why Portugal’s Controversial Exit from the F-35 Deal Raises NATO Concerns
Although no country has officially cited the kill switch as the reason for reconsidering their purchases, speculation has grown after the U.S. temporarily halted military aid to Ukraine, raising fears that a similar move could be used against F-35 buyers.
U.S. Rejects Rumors, But Control Concerns Remain
The U.S. has consistently denied the existence of any remote shutdown mechanism. Lockheed Martin, the jet’s manufacturer, reinforced the Pentagon’s statement, emphasizing that the F-35 program remains a global partnership with no hidden control features.
While the existence of a physical “kill switch” has been denied, experts highlight that modern military platforms like the F-35 are deeply integrated with software and data services maintained by the supplier nation. Stacie Pettyjohn, director of the defense program at the Center for a New American Security, noted that although there isn’t an electronic kill switch, the U.S. could potentially hinder F-35 operations by severing maintenance support, halting shipments of spare parts, or cutting off access to U.S. computer networks, thereby quickly hobbling the aircraft.
China’s Veiled Warning to US; WZ-9 Drone Could Detect F-35 and B-21
Canada’s Dilemma & Global Implications
Canada is at the center of the controversy, having already paid for its first 16 F-35s but now reconsidering the rest of the order.
Canada has already paid for 16 F-35s but is rethinking its order for the remaining jets. The country is now considering European alternatives like the Saab Gripen (Sweden) or the Future Combat Air System (France-Germany-Spain).
At the same time, Canada’s air force is struggling. A recent report says that only 40% of its military aircraft are combat-ready. With its aging CF-18 fighter jets, Canada needs to make a decision fast.
Shock Exit? NATO Allies Reconsider F 35 Deals Amid Growing U.S. Distrust!
Meanwhile, Germany is increasing its investment in Eurofighter Typhoons, and Portugal has stepped away from the F-35 program entirely.
The debate over a possible kill switch highlights growing distrust in U.S. military agreements. While Washington has strongly denied the existence of any remote shutdown feature, concerns over software access, spare parts supply, and long-term dependence on the U.S. continue to shape global defense decisions.
