Have you considered that it isn't "emotional", and that people accept that the RCAF would end up with a less capable aircraft, but Canada would be less dependant on a giant US defence company. One of the companies the current US administration is trying to take more control over...
We are already linked my ITAR on so many things that getting away from ITAR completely is not a realistic option, that doesn't mean we need to go full USAF and just buy what they buy.
I disagree, I've been following this specific procurement debacle for over a decade at this point and the emotional arguments have only strengthened as time has went on, especially recently (not without some merit). Many people are frankly either misled or deluded into alternatives to the F-35, this has been true for decades, as the F-35 has been constantly followed by a cloud of misinformation.
Calling it a "less capable aircraft" doesn't adequately address how much of a gap exists between the platforms, it's not even a comparison and one of the many reasons why the Gripen has flopped on the international market, while the F-35 is thriving. People are more willing to say yes to what they view as "good enough" when they don't realize how much better the alternative is, especially when they've wound themselves up in this security blanket of nationalism.
It isn't a "less dependent" issue here, it's either one or the other. If you are willing to still accept a fighter that can be grounded and crippled by the US in many of the same ways but is worse in most ways than the alternative, what ultimately is the point besides a limp wristed and harmful political stand?
If we truly want to be sovereign, make the actual plunge and go French or whatever else. Playing this nonsensical exclusive political game between Saab and Lockheed Martin shows how fundamentally unserious we are, and how this is very likely a weak play to attempt to extract more from the Americans.
I'm less worried about export at this time... The F-35 seems to be having some export struggles right now too. America already blocked one country from getting the Gripen openly, so how much have they been using heavy handed tactics to "encourage" countries to pick the F-35 over other options privately?
Exports are very important because they show the kind of integration and alliance base you are working with, which is especially important given Canada's commitments to its allies abroad. It's also relevant given Canada is/will be involved in production of either aircraft as well.
Over 1,200 F-35's of all models exist as of the end of 2025, there was 300~ Gripen's of all models in existence as of 2023.
Australia, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States and Israel either currently do/or will operate the F-35 in the future.
Brazil, Sweden, Czech Republic (phasing out for F-35), Hungary, South Africa, Thailand and Peru either currently do/will operate the Gripen in the future.
Even if you want to write off a sizable number of the F-35 customer purchases as some kind of forced sale (questionable in my opinion), it's clear what the choice of much of NATO has been for decades given the sizable interest in the JSF program for years.
I'm not particularly worried about the jobs numbers, all companies lie about them. Pretending SAAB is somehow unique and evil for it is disingenuous on the part of the F-35 supporters.
You might not be, but other Canadians and most worryingly, our politicians seem to be very worried about jobs numbers. The Industry Minister hasn't backed down from her effective tacit support for the Gripen proposal, even troublingly when their proposal seems to be an outright lie. Defence contractors lie all the time, but Saab is being incredibly open with these claims and continues to get away with flaunting this fantasy in the public square. If Lockheed Martin came out and said that they'd bring 30,000 new jobs to Canada, I'd be similarly saying they are living in a fantasy.
To be clear, I don't think the F-35 is necessarily the wrong choice for Canada, but I think that it is politically untenable to buy the full order, and that ignoring other options is silly. If the CAF/RCAF want to keep public support behind re-arming and recapitalizing, they need to meet them part way and not just do what we have always done since the end of WWII, and spend our dollars in America.
The other options were not ignored, quite the opposite. The torturous process of procurement involving fighters over the past decade plus has clearly shown that. If anything, I'd argue we are currently ignoring other options given this fighter review is limited to only Lockheed Martin and Saab, not permitting a "fair and open" competition. If we are truly looking for options, why is the field so limited? Sounds to me like it's this way because we have certain people enthralled by the potential of Saab's bid or this is charade to pressure Lockheed Martin into giving us additional concessions.
To be frank, I do not care what the political base thinks about military procurement. Expecting the RCAF to knee cap themselves for decades to come to appease people who have no idea what they are talking about except for poorly researched opinions and their emotions is laughable. I have extreme doubts anybody is going to remember this procurement a week after the choice is ultimately made, they definitely aren't voting on it. The public has shown they don't care about the CAF and are happy to ignore them when it is convenient, I don't actually believe people care about this procurement outside of the typical performative anti-Americanism we currently see across the board.
www.flightglobal.com
