From a set of inputs I added into ChatGPT:
Yes — if Canada selects Hanwha’s submarine design (likely the KSS-III variant or a customized Canadian AIP/SSK design), it further increases the odds of a Canada–South Korea–Sweden 6th-generation fighter partnership.
This would be a major geopolitical and industrial shift, and it strengthens the triangle in several ways.
Below is a clear, realistic breakdown.
1. Choosing Hanwha submarines would dramatically deepen Canada–Korea defense ties
Until now, Canada and South Korea have had mainly commercial links — not deep military-industrial ties.
A submarine deal would change that.
✔ Canada becomes a major Korean defense customer
A submarine program is $20–60 billion over its lifetime.
This creates:
- shared technology management
- shared training systems
- shared R&D
- shared shipyard engineering
- long-term after-service agreements
These are the exact kinds of ties that precede fighter co-development in other countries.
✔ South Korea gains confidence in Canada as an industrial partner
If Canada trusts Korea for submarines — among the most sensitive platforms — then Korea will trust Canada for:
- secure communications development
- stealth materials
- electronics suites
- joint fighter engine testing
- weapons integration
Trust is the currency of joint 6th-gen fighter projects.
✔ Korea becomes invested in Canadian industrial capacity
If Canadian shipyards or engineering centers are involved in a Hanwha submarine project, Korea becomes economically tied to Canada — making a future aerospace partnership more natural.
Scenario | Estimated Probability of a Joint 6th-Gen Jet |
| Before anything | ~10% |
| After Gripen production + Korean AEW on Global 6500 | ~30–40% |
| After Canada buys Hanwha submarines | ~50–60% |
With a submarine deal, the odds cross into “a real possibility” territory.
5. Why the submarine choice matters so much
✔ Submarines require highly sensitive information sharing
This includes:
- acoustic signatures
- AIP systems
- combat management systems
- weapon integration
- stealth hull materials
- sonar algorithms
If Korea shares this with Canada, it signals a strategic intimacy far beyond normal defense trade.
✔ Long program timelines align with fighter development
Submarines and fighters both have 25–40 year development cycles.
Shared timelines create natural windows for joint R&D transitions.
✔ Cross-domain integration becomes possible
Future warfare revolves around:
- air–sea sensor fusion
- AI networks
- shared drone swarms
- undersea-to-air data links
A Canada–Korea submarine partnership could feed directly into next-gen combat cloud development — a core part of any 6th-gen fighter.
6. What remains the final barrier?
Only one major obstacle remains:
Canada must politically commit to being a “producer nation,” not just a buyer
This means:
- committing billions over decades
- forming a national defense industrial strategy
- guaranteeing domestic production for fighters and subs
- shifting procurement culture away from U.S. defaults
If Canada does that, the partnership becomes not only possible but strategically natural.
Yes — if Canada buys Hanwha submarines, the probability of a Canada–Sweden–South Korea 6th-generation fighter partnership rises substantially.
Combined with:
- Gripens built in Canada
- Korea adopting Bombardier AEW aircraft
…this forms the strongest industrial and geopolitical foundation Canada has ever had for joining a next-generation fighter design program.
Canada would go from being “a customer nation” to a true co-developer, which is a precondition for any 6th-generation project.
2. Sweden benefits indirectly
You might not expect it, but Sweden is strengthened too:
✔ Sweden prefers partners who diversify away from U.S. supply chains
A Canada–Korea submarine partnership signals that Canada is opening its defense markets and reducing reliance on U.S. military procurement.
Sweden sees that as a green light to pursue deeper industrial fusion.
✔ Sweden and Korea already share interests in naval + aerospace innovation
Both nations are mid-sized powers that rely on high-tech solutions rather than huge fleets.
A tri-national 6th-gen partnership fits their strategic style.
3. Strategic Triangular Effect: Gripen + AEW + Submarines
If all of the following happen:
Bombardier + Saab build Gripens in Canada
– Canada and Sweden lock in a long-term aerospace partnership.
South Korea adopts the Bombardier Global 6500 for AEW
– Korea connects its airborne early warning needs to Canadian aerospace.
Canada adopts Hanwha submarines
– Canada and Korea form a deep naval-industrial alliance.
➜ Outcome: A powerful three-way strategic bond
This becomes very similar to the industrial ecosystems behind major fighter programs like:
- GCAP (UK–Japan–Italy)
- FCAS (France–Germany–Spain
These programs formed after decades of cross-platform defense ties.
Canada–Sweden–Korea could replicate this structure.
4. How much does this change the probability?
Let’s quantify the rough, conceptual odds:
