A partnership with Saab increasingly looks like the best move to strengthen Canada’s resilience and long-term military industrial capacity.
For decades, Canada has taken a short-term approach to military procurement. Generally, our country would wait until a crisis point was reached before trying to make a desperate purchase to fill a glaring capability gap. Once the crisis had passed, we would move on with a few lessons learned.
In some cases, we simply accepted the loss or significant reduction of a capability. Prioritizing the short-term is what left us with near-obsolete fighter jets, four submarines of dubious quality, a dwindling tank fleet, insufficient levels of ammunition production, and an overreliance on the United States.
And since the present is the accumulation of short-term, medium-term, and long-term decisions, we find ourselves facing the same challenges once again.
Some important steps are being taken, as Canada’s new submarines (whether built by a German firm or a South Korean firm) will be high-quality and relatively substantial in number, given our needs. Still, Canada has a lot of catching up to do, and the way we manage that catching up will determine whether we build resilience or whether we repeat the errors of the past.
And that brings us to the impending decision on whether to buy F-35s, Saab Gripen-Es, or both to replace our CF-18s. From a pure capability and short-term standpoint, F-35s are the best choice. They are advanced and proven aircraft; Canada has long-standing connections to the F-35 program, and purchasing F-35s could help trade talks between Canada and the U.S.
With that in mind, there are two important downsides to consider. First, the F-35 is expensive, meaning we would be paying a lot for a relatively small number of aircraft. Though the capability of the aircraft can make this worth it, we are also seeing a rapid shift towards autonomous aircraft and mass-produced drones, meaning there is a risk of being stuck with an expensive legacy system. Second, there is always a risk that the United States would use our reliance on F-35s as leverage. While it would have been unthinkable before this year, we can imagine a scenario in which the U.S. threatens to withhold parts and software updates for CF-35s unless Canada concedes to an unrelated U.S. demand.
And this is where resilience comes in, and why partnering with Saab makes strategic sense for Canada. Military procurement is one of the areas in which the pursuit of pure efficiency is not necessarily wise. The most efficient choice is often to buy from another country rather than try to build up domestic capacity, but that efficiency comes at a cost – a cost that may be paid in the event of a conflict when your supplier decides to prioritize their own needs at the most crucial moment. So, some inefficient ‘redundancy’ is often wise.
In the case of Canada’s impending fighter jet purchase, we should be investing our tax dollars in such a way as to ensure we build domestic production capability that can spur growth and innovation in the Canadian military aerospace sector.
As reported by the Globe & Mail, Saab and Bombardier are in talks to build Gripen fighter jets in Canada.
“Sweden’s Saab AB and Bombardier Inc. are in discussions to build the Saab Gripen fighter-jet in Canada, the Montreal aerospace company says.
Bombardier confirmed that the talks are under way after Saab chief executive officer Micael Johansson said in recent interviews that the company wants to expand production capacity of the multirole supersonic jet outside of Sweden. Canada is among the countries that might be able to assemble the aircraft, he said.
“We confirm discussions with Saab about the Gripen,” Mark Masluch, Bombardier’s senior director of communications, told The Globe and Mail on Friday. “Bombardier is open to providing local expertise if the government of Canada decides to go this route.”
A senior Canadian government source, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the talks between Saab and Bombardier, told The Globe that a “JV [is] being worked out between Saab and Bombardier,” referring to a possible production joint venture.”
If such a deal went forward, it would be quite beneficial for Canada. The immediate benefit would be in job creation and the formation of a partnership with a nation – Sweden – that punches above its weight in terms of military innovation. The long-term benefit would be in Canadians gaining the knowledge and experience necessary to produce advanced fighter jets, which would have positive spin-off effects for the broader aerospace sector.
Saab is also working on unmanned fighters, meaning a close Saab-Canada relationship featuring domestic production of Saab aircraft could help us make strides toward producing them here at home.
Partnering with Saab would be a decision to build a key long-term capability for Canada, rather than focus only on the short-term.
With all of this in mind, I believe the best move is still for Canada to buy some F-35s (though fewer than the 88 originally planned), and sign a deal with Saab to produce Gripens for the CAF. This would address our short-term need for advanced fighter jets and set us up well for the long term. While such an approach would entail higher upfront costs, running a mixed fighter jet fleet creates some challenges, but I see those challenges as worth it for the long-term resilience it would provide.
Spencer Fernando
Image – Saab – YouTube
If this piece left you clearer than it found you, that's the point. I write for readers who want to think past the week, to see the longer pattern beneath the daily story, and to come away steadier rather than more agitated.
That longer view gets built somewhere. On Patreon, essay by essay, I'm constructing The Long Work, a body of analysis meant to outlast the news cycle that prompted it. The readers there make it possible. No subsidies, no strings. The work answers to them.
$8/month to read it as it's built, and to have a hand in building it.
Good analysis, technically, economically and politically.
Thank you, Bill, much appreciated.