Amid all the hullabaloo over a potential ‘kill switch’ on the US-origin F-35 Lightning II stealth aircraft and the growing suspicion among its buyers, the Pentagon has stepped up to finally put all the rumors and misgivings to rest.
Earlier this month, German security experts expressed concern that in the event of a disagreement between the US and Germany, the Donald Trump administration would have the power to pull a “kill switch” on the F-35 Lightning II fighters to disrupt the Luftwaffe’s operation of the aircraft.
German media reports suggested the country might have to scrutinize its aircraft purchase.
Following this, two countries—Portugal and Canada—also expressed apprehensions about purchasing the aircraft. While the Portuguese Defense Minister reneged on a previous decision to buy the aircraft, Canada indicated it was re-examining the order. Neither country, however, specifically mentioned the kill switch.
While unverified reports and rumors of a US-controlled kill switch in the F-35 have been circulating for some time, the US temporarily halting military aid to Ukraine has fuelled concerns that it could be used against allies operating the F-35.
A kill switch is typically believed to be a software-based backdoor mechanism that could be used by the supplier of a technology to disable or deteriorate the operation of a system, in this particular case, the F-35 stealth fighter jets.
As the events unfold and rumors swirl, the Pentagon has finally stepped in to reassure its partners in the F-35 program that the stealth fighter has no “kill switch” and that the Pentagon cannot magically disrupt it remotely.
“There is no kill switch,” the Joint Program Office (JPO) for the F-35 program said in a statement. “The program operates under well-established agreements that ensure all F-35 operators have the necessary capabilities to sustain and operate their aircraft effectively. The strength of the F-35 program lies in its global partnership, and we remain committed to providing all users with the full functionality and support they require.”
The JPO also reaffirmed that one of the program’s biggest advantages is its global reach. “The F-35 was conceived, developed, and continues to be operated and sustained as a joint/coalition platform, built on strong partnerships with U.S. allies and partner nations across the globe,” the statement said.
The development comes amid rising skepticism over the purchase of the high-tech platform. The JPO and Lockheed Martin are potentially concerned about the changing global perception of the aircraft, which could eventually lead to tanking sales after two years of bagging contracts.
In a separate statement, Lockheed Martin, the aircraft manufacturer, said the company “is committed to helping our customers strengthen their airpower and security with the F-35. The F-35 program recently surpassed 1 million flight hours across 16 military services flying the aircraft. We remain committed to providing the reliable and capable F-35 to enable our customers to complete their missions and come home safely.”
Earlier, Joachim Schranzhofer, head of communications at defense company Hensoldt in Germany, sparked a global frenzy and contributed to the rumor by stating: “The F-35 kill switch is not just a rumor. A simpler way is through a mission planning system that will not allow the fighter to land.”
Soon after these controversial comments were made, Swiss and Belgian military officials were reassured that the US could not disrupt the operation of an aircraft in another air force by pressing a switch. Military experts have also asserted on multiple occasions that fears of an F-35 kill switch are unfounded and ridiculous.
Nonetheless, the skepticism surrounding the F-35 is ostensibly based on the erratic decision-making of US President Donald Trump. The halting (and then resuming) military aid to Ukraine in recent times and negotiating a ceasefire with Russia without Europe’s consent have given an impression that the US President could not be relied on.
In fact, it is believed that even though the US administration does not sit on a kill switch, it can easily block the supply of spare parts and block access to software upgrades essential for keeping the aircraft operational and combat-ready.
Moreover, it is pertinent to note that no aircraft buyer can fully control the aircraft. The F-35’s manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, an American defense company, has repeatedly refused to provide its entire “source code” to foreign clients, including close allies of the United States.
Source code is the core programming that enables all of the aircraft’s functions and consists of at least 8 million lines of code. Every training or combat mission flown by a Canadian F-35 will necessitate a “mission data load” handled through specialized computing facilities in the United States because the source code is a closely guarded secret, as previously explained by the EurAsian Times.
Thus, the Pentagon might have to do more to inspire confidence among F-35 buyers and prospective customers than just bust the rumors about the kill switch.
Though the German government has not rallied behind the kill switch rhetoric, it is nonetheless buying more Eurofighter Typhoons and splurging on defense for self-reliance. On the other hand, Portugal has decided to ditch the ace stealth fighter.
Canada’s case remains the most curious due to deteriorating diplomatic ties.
Canada Is Skeptical Of F-35 But At What Cost?
Hours after being reappointed to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s new cabinet, Defense Minister Bill Blair said on March 14 that Canada is actively considering alternatives to the US F-35 stealth fighter and is considering opening talks with rival aircraft manufacturers.
Canada has ordered 88 fifth-generation F-35A fighters from the United States, one of the largest defense expenditures in the country’s history. However, Donald Trump’s slapping tariffs on Ottawa and even hinting at annexing the country as the 51st state of the United States of America ever since he became the US President has caused disenchantment in the North American country.
The Canadian public has been rallying behind canceling the CAD 19 billion (US$13.27 billion) deal. The first tranche of 16 F-35A fighters is scheduled to arrive in the country early next year. Canada has already paid for these aircraft. However, a rethink continues for the remaining aircraft on order.
Giving a gist of the scenarios considered so far, Blair said the initial F-35s might be approved, and the rest of the fleet would consist of planes from European vendors, like the Saab (Gripen), which was built in Sweden and placed second in the competition. If Canada cancels the F-35 deal, it could turn to the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), a European joint fighter project led by France, Germany, and Spain.
Additionally, Prime Minister Carney said, “We had a discussion about Canada’s options and the fact is that under the [F-35] contract, as you may know, there are — after a certain number of purchases — we have options on subsequent aircraft.”
As previously reported by EurAsian Times, Canada has chosen the F-35 Lightning II over the Saab Gripen-E, which was also on offer.
However, while Ottawa dithers on the F-35 acquisition, new reports suggest that the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) is plagued by a readiness problem. A new military-wide readiness assessment obtained by CBC News states that only 40% of the Canadian Air Force inventory is deemed serviceable and combat-ready.
The document, dated February 18, 2025, states that 60% of the Air Force’s inventory is “unserviceable” and likely unfit for deployment if NATO were to call upon Canada.
“The notion of reducing the number of U.S.-built F-35s — as much as it may feel good politically and play well among an angry public — comes at an extremely vulnerable time for Canada’s air force. Much of its combat capability is made up of aging CF-18 fighter jets, which governments of both political stripes have hesitated in replacing — mostly for political reasons,” writes CBC.
Against that backdrop, Canada might have to make some tough decisions and make them soon enough to ensure that its combat capability and national security are not at risk.
- Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari9555 (at) gmail.com
- Follow EurAsian Times on Google News
