Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Le canada a choisi définitivment le gripen
Executive Summary
Canada has not definitively chosen the Saab Gripen as its next fighter jet; available reporting shows an active, unresolved debate over the F-35, Gripen E, and a possible mixed approach, with political, industrial and alliance consequences in play. Recent coverage from September–October 2025 describes talks, warnings from the United States, and proposals emphasizing domestic production and economic benefits, but no single authoritative source confirms a final procurement decision. The claim that “le Canada a choisi définitivment le Gripen” is not supported by the compiled evidence [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. The headline many want: “Gripen is Canada’s choice” — What the pro-Gripen material actually says
Promotional and advocacy material positions the Gripen as a competitive option for Canada, highlighting cost control, industrial offsets, and domestic manufacturing promises that appeal politically and economically. Saab’s earlier communications framed the Gripen as well-suited to Canadian basing and budgetary realities, and some reporting cites Saab’s offer to build aircraft in Canada and create high-tech jobs as a major selling point. None of this material constitutes a government contract award or a final procurement decision; it presents an industrial pitch and favorable analysis rather than an executed procurement [5] [3].
2. The counter-argument: Why proponents still push the F-35 as the default interoperability choice
Defence analysts and some political actors continue to argue for the F-35 on grounds of 5th-generation capability and allied interoperability, especially given NORAD and close operational ties with the United States. U.S. officials have publicly warned Ottawa about potential consequences of not acquiring the F-35, including impacts on integrated defence arrangements, signaling that the choice has alliance-level implications beyond cost and jobs. These arguments emphasize capability parity with near-peer threats and logistical simplicity from relying on the same platform as the U.S. and many NATO partners [6] [2].
3. Politics and procurement: Ottawa’s tightrope between industry and alliance pressures
Recent reporting shows the Canadian government navigating competing pressures: domestic demands for industrial benefits and job creation favor offers like Saab’s, while diplomatic and security ties push toward the F-35 for interoperability. Public comments from ministers and coverage of visits to both Saab and Lockheed indicate that engagements are ongoing and “normal,” not indicative of a final selection. The $19 billion program remains contested politically, with the government weighing long-term industrial strategy against alliance assurances and capability requirements [3] [7].
4. The NORAD warning: Is it a dealbreaker or a negotiating lever?
U.S. officials have warned of negative consequences if Canada abandons the F-35, framing interoperability concerns as potential risks to joint continental defence. This messaging can be read two ways: as a substantive statement about system-level integration and data-sharing, or as diplomatic pressure aimed at influencing Ottawa’s procurement calculus. Reporting from mid-to-late September 2025 documents these warnings but does not show an explicit U.S. ultimatum or concrete measures taken, underscoring that the issue is both technical and political rather than settled fact [2] [1].
5. The “build in Canada” debate: Can procurement revive the defence industrial base?
Several analyses explore whether Canada could or should rebuild sovereign aircraft production capability, using a Gripen deal with Canadian manufacturing as a springboard. Proposals and commentary emphasize potential long-term benefits for the defence industrial base, skilled employment, and technology transfer. Yet reports caution that scaling complex fighter production domestically entails high upfront costs, supply chain challenges, and years of investment, and that such promises are often conditional on contract structure and sustained government support [8] [4].
6. Evidence snapshot and timeline: What the sources actually document, dated
The most concrete, dated items in the dataset are reporting from September 2025 that highlights reconsideration of a mixed fleet and U.S. warnings (p1_s2 dated 2025-09-27; [2] dated 2025-09-15), an August 2025 article on Saab and procurement visits (p2_s1 dated 2025-08-20), and an early October 2025 discussion on domestic production strategy (p3_s3 dated 2025-10-03). None of these pieces reports a contract award or an official government announcement of a final decision; they document ongoing deliberations and public diplomacy.
7. Bottom line: Claim check and what to watch next
The statement that Canada has “definitively” chosen the Gripen is false based on the assembled reporting. The procurement remains unresolved, characterized by active lobbying, alliance concerns, and political trade-offs. Watch for an official procurement announcement from the Canadian government or Public Services and Procurement Canada to confirm a binding decision; absent that, reports of final selection reflect advocacy, negotiation postures, or speculation rather than a closed contract [5] [1] [2] [3] [8] [4].