Did Sweden officially select the F-35 over the JAS 39 Gripen and in what year was the decision made?

1. What the record shows about Sweden’s choice — no citation that Sweden picked the F‑35

None of the supplied articles state that Sweden officially selected the F‑35 to replace its JAS‑39 or that Stockholm made such a procurement decision; contemporary analyses discuss Sweden’s Gripen fleet as part of NATO airpower and compare Gripen and F‑35 capabilities, but they treat Sweden as a Gripen operator rather than an F‑35 buyer ^{[1] [3]}. Therefore, the claim that Sweden “officially selected the F‑35 over the Gripen” is not supported by the current set of sources (not found in current reporting).

2. Where decisions between F‑35 and Gripen did happen — Finland and others

The clearest, cited example of an F‑35 selection in the Nordic context is Finland: multiple sources note Finland ordered F‑35s via its HX program, with reporting indicating the final decision emerged in 2021 ^{[2] [1]}. Other countries (Czech Republic, Canada, Portugal and others) appear in the sources as either having chosen the F‑35, revisiting prior decisions, or considering the Gripen as an alternative — but these are national procurements, not Swedish choices ^{[4] [5] [6]}.

3. How reporting frames Sweden’s airpower role — Gripen as Sweden’s contribution to NATO

Analysts link Sweden’s Gripen fleet to NATO’s regional airpower mix and emphasize that Sweden’s Gripens “can quickly support ground forces,” suggesting Stockholm’s existing force posture is still built around the JAS‑39 platform ^[1]. Several opinion and defence-technology pieces in the results discuss Gripen’s operational model and how it competes with the F‑35 on cost, maintenance and certain mission profiles ^{[3] [7]}.

4. Confusion points and why readers see divergent claims

Coverage in the results shows active debates and contests where the F‑35 often wins capability-based competitions while Gripen sometimes scores better on cost and industrial offsets ^{[8] [4]}. That pattern fuels headlines claiming the F‑35 “beats” Gripen in specific procurements (e.g., Canada’s 2021 tests, Czech decisions), but those refer to other countries’ selection processes — not to Sweden’s internal procurement ^{[4] [9]}. Misreading these contests can lead to the mistaken belief Sweden itself switched to F‑35.

5. What the supplied sources say about dates and formal decisions

The only firm date-related procurement point clearly supported by the provided set is Finland’s F‑35 selection around 2021 as part of its HX process ^[2]. Canada’s original selection of F‑35s and subsequent reviews are discussed (including a 2022 selection then review in 2025), but those are Canadian decisions, not Swedish ^{[6] [10]}. There is no source here showing a Swedish government decision date to buy F‑35s (not found in current reporting).

6. Competing perspectives and motives visible in the coverage

Pro‑Gripen reporting emphasizes national sovereignty, lower operating costs, and Sweden’s defense‑industry interests (Saab’s marketing and export pushes appear repeatedly) while pro‑F‑35 accounts stress fifth‑generation stealth and sensor fusion advantages that drove other nations’ choices ^{[3] [7] [11]}. Saab and national advocates pushing Gripen exports have commercial incentives; likewise, F‑35 backers emphasize alliance interoperability and capability that support U.S. industry and partner integration ^{[7] [11]}.

7. Bottom line for your original question

Based on the provided sources: Sweden has not been shown here to have “officially selected the F‑35 over the JAS‑39 Gripen,” and no year for such a Swedish decision appears in the supplied reporting. Available sources instead document other countries’ F‑35 selections (notably Finland in 2021) and ongoing comparisons and export contests between Gripen and F‑35 ^{[2] [4] [3]}.