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.
Which countries have chosen the Gripen over the F-35 for their air forces?
Executive summary
Available reporting in the provided set shows several countries operate or have ordered the Saab Gripen and others operate or have ordered the Lockheed Martin F‑35, but none of the sources present a single, explicit list framed as “countries that chose Gripen over F‑35.” Reporting notes that Sweden, the Czech Republic and Hungary operate Gripens and that many NATO and allied nations are adopting the F‑35; Canada and Portugal are specifically described as reconsidering F‑35 purchases in favour of Gripen offers (or at least debating the alternative) [1] [2] [3] [4]. Available sources do not provide a definitive, comprehensive catalogue of nations that explicitly picked Gripen instead of an F‑35 contract in a head‑to‑head procurement.
1. Gripen operators cited by reporting — who’s already flying it
Several pieces explicitly treat Sweden, the Czech Republic and Hungary as current Gripen operators and reference their participation in NATO operations while using the type [1]. Those countries are presented as real‑world Gripen users, which demonstrates Saab’s export footprint even as the aircraft competes with higher‑profile F‑35 procurements elsewhere [1].
2. F‑35 adoption across NATO and allies — scale matters in the comparison
Reporting emphasizes the F‑35’s role as “the primary fighter jet for many NATO nations” and notes roughly 20 nations either operate or have agreements to buy the F‑35, making it the dominant choice for countries prioritizing fifth‑generation stealth and deep interoperability with U.S. forces [5] [1]. That scale shapes procurement decisions: countries that prize U.S. interoperability have a clear incentive toward the F‑35 [1].
3. Cases described as direct comparisons or contests — Canada and Portugal in focus
Multiple sources frame recent procurement debates as direct Gripen vs F‑35 contests. Canada is the most prominent example in the reporting: Saab has actively pitched the Gripen‑E as an alternative to Canada’s planned F‑35 purchases, and Canadian political debate — including a cabinet review and letters from former officers — has centred on whether to keep the F‑35 order or shift toward Gripen [4] [3] [1]. AVweb and other outlets cite Canada and Portugal as countries that have reconsidered F‑35 buys and viewed the Gripen as a likely alternative [2]. These accounts describe competition and reconsideration, not a definitive switch in every case [4] [3] [2].
4. Where reporting claims a country “chose” Gripen — read carefully
Some pieces assert specific export successes: for example, snippets claim Thailand announced acquisitions of Gripen E/F in 2024 and that Colombia was “poised” to acquire Gripen as of April 2025 [6]. But within the provided set these assertions are brief, variably sourced, and not presented as part of a consistent list of nations that expressly rejected F‑35 offers in favour of Gripen. The articles focus more on market momentum and bid competition than clean win/lose tallies [6].
5. Why procurement outcomes aren’t a binary “Gripen vs F‑35” choice
Reporting highlights that procurement decisions are influenced by cost, industrial offsets (jobs, local assembly), sovereign‑control concerns (software/IP), alliance interoperability, and politics — all factors that can lead a country to prefer one platform without directly “choosing” it over the other in a head‑to‑head tender [7] [1] [3]. For example, Saab’s pitch to build Gripens domestically is framed as a jobs and sovereignty argument intended to sway countries reviewing F‑35 deals [7] [6].
6. Competing narratives and where sources disagree
Some outlets stress Gripen’s cost‑effectiveness and operational flexibility compared with the F‑35 [3] [8]. Others and defence professionals defend the F‑35’s advanced sensors, stealth and interoperability advantages [1] [5]. The CBC and CTV pieces underscore active lobbying and political pressure on both sides in Canada’s debate, showing that the “choice” often reflects domestic politics as much as technical tradeoffs [4] [9].
7. Bottom line and research gaps to resolve the question definitively
The provided reporting documents operators of Gripen (Sweden, Czechia, Hungary) and widespread F‑35 adoption, and it highlights active contests (notably Canada and Portugal) where Gripen has been offered as an alternative [1] [5] [2] [3]. However, the sources do not supply a clear, authoritative list of countries that explicitly chose Gripen in lieu of the F‑35 in a direct procurement duel. To produce a definitive roster you would need procurement decisions, contract signatures or official ministry statements not contained in the current reporting set — those documents are not found in the sources provided (not found in current reporting).