I took the liberty of sending this piece to my MP who is a Liberal. Not a cabinet member, unfortunately. However her constituency (and the city in which I live) includes a large air base. Not as large as it once was, but it still might have some weight. Perhaps others might do the same. (My cover letter indicated that we shouldn’t be supporting the bloated military-industrial complex of a country that wishes to annex us; and that Narayan is a brilliant strategist.)
Thank you Donna for this suggestion. I will send same to my MP who is also a cabinet minister and a woman whom I respect greatly and thank you Shankar for this brilliant piece. I hope our government is on this same track.
Definitely like your options of doing something - right now. Let's align with another nation that has our own values and geography; grow instead of study, participate in the wider world and get over the fact that the US is no longer our bestest buddy. Wake up our manufacturing sector to other industries than internal combustion automobiles. Make research institutions do interesting stuff with Australia, Japan, and Ukraine to harness everyone's brain power. I've only got about 25 years left on the odometer, and I'm just giddy that the kids who can't get a job today will be able to build valuable things and relationships as far as the eye can see.
Should Carney wait for the upcoming renegotiation of the USMCA and the final results? And if Canada is bullied on unacceptable terms being imposed on us, then formerly activate discussions with SAAB?
In such case it would not keep SAAB to long on hold...
tuff one. I really don't know, as PMs team would have got subtle signals from Washington. With trade negotiations going on and with Iran crisis throwing a curve ball, it is indeed risky to pull this off right now. Needs time. That is why I suggested that they take a circular route to buy time.
If Canada doesn’t decide very soon, India might become the runner-up partner. That would push Canada back on US-dependency and those two terms are oxymorons right now.
Yet to be fair, I was reading articles last year discussing how our next fleet, including Gripens, but adding South Korean fighter jets, in a different role, could be a possibility. (I’m not sure I could track that story down now). The reasoning was that Gripens alone will not perform with the necessary effectiveness of the American options in a combat situation. Therefore, at least short term, until our next generation aircraft emerges there must be more capability and thus a mixed fleet.
I have not heard anything on that matter more recently, but it seemed a fairly compelling argument at the time.
Yes, I knew that, but I really don’t know how the Gripen stacks up against the Rafaele, or whether having both would be an advantage. Just tossing ideas around in this case.
Someone in Ottawa needs to give their stones a firm grasp and tug and SIGN THE GRYPEN DEAL…TODAY! Commit and execute. Is Carney surrounded by timid swivel servants with feet of clay!?
I agree with this tactic. Canada has been delaying the ultimate decision of which fighter jet to go with for some time, perhaps saving a card for the CUSMA discussions set to take place this summer. I don’t see a political advantage in aggravating the US before the discussions happen. But purchasing other SAAB products is certainly a good start in keeping all of the irons in the fire.
Nonsense. They ought lead with their chin; with intent instead of dithering and leading with their arse to back into it. That will just show weakness and annoy the world. Do their jobs confidently or get out of the way.
I had been wondering what came of the promising Saab/Canada co-manufacturing negotiations, am disappointed to learn the extent to which US fulminations about NAFTA compliancy stopped them dead. This is a reasonable proposition, a way forward. Glad to ne reading Concis Canada.
You need mobility on the field. Fire power. Air defense. You cannot control the sky above your land without it. Drones will remain central and everything else will now organize around it. Western offensive firepower is built with air dominance in mind.
Buy twelve F-35 aircraft for use as “wild weasel” aircraft to defeat air defenses. Buy Gripen for the rest. They are cheaper to buy and astronomically cheaper to maintain and can be used from expedient airfields like highways. Spending a lot of money on American weapons is counter-productive. Build Gripens in Canada. Build up your own arms industry. Work with reliable partners which the US is not.
Sounds like an excellent plan. Very clear analysis. I wish Canada could escape the grip of the US. Perhaps the Japanese experience of years' long delays could be a reason to waiver on the American planes. Lack of dependability.
I love this article. One of your best I have read. Clear, concise and with answers that can be acted on now. One question though; are there any other countries presently flying the Gripen?
I didn't know why Rafales were such good fighter jets.
Googling shows "As a multirole fighter, it can engage enemy aircraft, provide close air support, and strike critical infrastructure, all with a single airframe. This level of flexibility is rare, and it’s a key reason why the Rafale aircraft is so highly valued by air forces worldwide.
Central to the Rafale Dassault avionics suite is the Thales RBE2 AESA radar, which gives the jet exceptional detection, tracking, and targeting capabilities. This radar allows the Rafale fighter jet to detect multiple targets over long distances while remaining stealthy and resistant to jamming.
Complementing this is the SPECTRA electronic warfare system, a defensive suite that actively protects the aircraft from radar-guided threats using advanced jamming, decoy, and detection technologies. It gives the Dassault Rafale fighter a digital edge in contested airspace, where survival often depends on who sees and strikes first."
Sweden is a small country (10 million), SaabAB has a small workforce (27,000). SaabAB needs more capacity and Canada can provide it. Saab wants to _build GripenE under license in Canada, which would keep defence spending in Canada, flowing to Canadian workers, companies and suppliers.
"Under license" means manufacturing is done at home and Saab gets a license fee for its blueprints, etc.
Building jets under license was a multiplier for Canada in the past. Canadair used to build Canada's fighter jets (CT-133, CF-86, CF-104, CF-5) under license in Canada. Canadair had even improved upon the F-86 by replacing its US-built GE engine with the better-performing Canadian-built Avro Orenda engine.
The multiplier: Canadair then also _created the Tutor (Snowbirds), the Challenger, the CRJ, the CL-415 "super scooper" water bomber.
The multiplier keeps working: Saab GlobalEye AWACS, just bought by France, uses Bombardier Global 6500 airframes -- airframes evolved directly from the CRJ ( Canadair Regional Jet ); the CL-415 "super scooper", now in much demand for fighting wild fires, is being updated by DeHavillandCanada as the DHC-515.
Sweden has been consistently steadfast about making its own jets. Partnering with Saab on GripenE puts Canada in position to help develop the next generation of jets, which could then also be built in Canada once the final GripenE rolls off the line.
I took the liberty of sending this piece to my MP who is a Liberal. Not a cabinet member, unfortunately. However her constituency (and the city in which I live) includes a large air base. Not as large as it once was, but it still might have some weight. Perhaps others might do the same. (My cover letter indicated that we shouldn’t be supporting the bloated military-industrial complex of a country that wishes to annex us; and that Narayan is a brilliant strategist.)
Thanks Donna. I hope they place one order..
Thank you Donna for this suggestion. I will send same to my MP who is also a cabinet minister and a woman whom I respect greatly and thank you Shankar for this brilliant piece. I hope our government is on this same track.
Definitely like your options of doing something - right now. Let's align with another nation that has our own values and geography; grow instead of study, participate in the wider world and get over the fact that the US is no longer our bestest buddy. Wake up our manufacturing sector to other industries than internal combustion automobiles. Make research institutions do interesting stuff with Australia, Japan, and Ukraine to harness everyone's brain power. I've only got about 25 years left on the odometer, and I'm just giddy that the kids who can't get a job today will be able to build valuable things and relationships as far as the eye can see.
Yes, yes and hell yes! Excellent suggestion Mr. Narayan. Your path makes the most sense. And Canada should listen.
Should Carney wait for the upcoming renegotiation of the USMCA and the final results? And if Canada is bullied on unacceptable terms being imposed on us, then formerly activate discussions with SAAB?
In such case it would not keep SAAB to long on hold...
Aim small
Miss small.
Why wait? Do it now. Which do you think puts you in a stronger negotiating position? It won’t be kowtowing to a bully.
tuff one. I really don't know, as PMs team would have got subtle signals from Washington. With trade negotiations going on and with Iran crisis throwing a curve ball, it is indeed risky to pull this off right now. Needs time. That is why I suggested that they take a circular route to buy time.
If Canada doesn’t decide very soon, India might become the runner-up partner. That would push Canada back on US-dependency and those two terms are oxymorons right now.
Yet to be fair, I was reading articles last year discussing how our next fleet, including Gripens, but adding South Korean fighter jets, in a different role, could be a possibility. (I’m not sure I could track that story down now). The reasoning was that Gripens alone will not perform with the necessary effectiveness of the American options in a combat situation. Therefore, at least short term, until our next generation aircraft emerges there must be more capability and thus a mixed fleet.
I have not heard anything on that matter more recently, but it seemed a fairly compelling argument at the time.
India just signed a deal with France to build the Raffle (French fighter jet ) so probably not the main competitor.
I thought that Canada already had plans to buy the Goldeneye plane from Saab.
Yes, I knew that, but I really don’t know how the Gripen stacks up against the Rafaele, or whether having both would be an advantage. Just tossing ideas around in this case.
Fair enough.
I would argue that Ukraine if the war ends would be a competitor as they have already decided to order the Gripen.
That’s interesting! I didn’t know that. Thanks!
Someone in Ottawa needs to give their stones a firm grasp and tug and SIGN THE GRYPEN DEAL…TODAY! Commit and execute. Is Carney surrounded by timid swivel servants with feet of clay!?
Gripen will be a difficult order to place. It is easier to get there by ordering something else.
I agree with this tactic. Canada has been delaying the ultimate decision of which fighter jet to go with for some time, perhaps saving a card for the CUSMA discussions set to take place this summer. I don’t see a political advantage in aggravating the US before the discussions happen. But purchasing other SAAB products is certainly a good start in keeping all of the irons in the fire.
I thought that there was a deal for the goldeneye monitoring plane from Saab. We need to buy that regardless and it isn’t dependent on the Gripen.
Nonsense. They ought lead with their chin; with intent instead of dithering and leading with their arse to back into it. That will just show weakness and annoy the world. Do their jobs confidently or get out of the way.
If you want to stay. Remember respect is a demand. Not an option. This will be your last warning.
I had been wondering what came of the promising Saab/Canada co-manufacturing negotiations, am disappointed to learn the extent to which US fulminations about NAFTA compliancy stopped them dead. This is a reasonable proposition, a way forward. Glad to ne reading Concis Canada.
Forgive my ignorance, but... why invest in fighter jets for modern war, instead of drones?
Drone warfare seems to be where war is now, a cloud of cheap maneuverable surveillance and bombs.
Or is it a multi-layered thing, you need the big expensive jets and missiles up top, and the cloud of drones under?
You need mobility on the field. Fire power. Air defense. You cannot control the sky above your land without it. Drones will remain central and everything else will now organize around it. Western offensive firepower is built with air dominance in mind.
Buy twelve F-35 aircraft for use as “wild weasel” aircraft to defeat air defenses. Buy Gripen for the rest. They are cheaper to buy and astronomically cheaper to maintain and can be used from expedient airfields like highways. Spending a lot of money on American weapons is counter-productive. Build Gripens in Canada. Build up your own arms industry. Work with reliable partners which the US is not.
62 months equals 5 years 2 months. Time flies.
Makes a lot of sense to me.
Sounds like an excellent plan. Very clear analysis. I wish Canada could escape the grip of the US. Perhaps the Japanese experience of years' long delays could be a reason to waiver on the American planes. Lack of dependability.
No sense of urgency from the Canadian bureaucracy
I love this article. One of your best I have read. Clear, concise and with answers that can be acted on now. One question though; are there any other countries presently flying the Gripen?
I didn't know why Rafales were such good fighter jets.
Googling shows "As a multirole fighter, it can engage enemy aircraft, provide close air support, and strike critical infrastructure, all with a single airframe. This level of flexibility is rare, and it’s a key reason why the Rafale aircraft is so highly valued by air forces worldwide.
Central to the Rafale Dassault avionics suite is the Thales RBE2 AESA radar, which gives the jet exceptional detection, tracking, and targeting capabilities. This radar allows the Rafale fighter jet to detect multiple targets over long distances while remaining stealthy and resistant to jamming.
Complementing this is the SPECTRA electronic warfare system, a defensive suite that actively protects the aircraft from radar-guided threats using advanced jamming, decoy, and detection technologies. It gives the Dassault Rafale fighter a digital edge in contested airspace, where survival often depends on who sees and strikes first."
https://defensefeeds.com/military-tech/air-force/fighters/dassault-rafale/
Yes, Saab GripenE for Canada.
Saab wants to expand GripenE production.
Sweden is a small country (10 million), SaabAB has a small workforce (27,000). SaabAB needs more capacity and Canada can provide it. Saab wants to _build GripenE under license in Canada, which would keep defence spending in Canada, flowing to Canadian workers, companies and suppliers.
"Under license" means manufacturing is done at home and Saab gets a license fee for its blueprints, etc.
Building jets under license was a multiplier for Canada in the past. Canadair used to build Canada's fighter jets (CT-133, CF-86, CF-104, CF-5) under license in Canada. Canadair had even improved upon the F-86 by replacing its US-built GE engine with the better-performing Canadian-built Avro Orenda engine.
The multiplier: Canadair then also _created the Tutor (Snowbirds), the Challenger, the CRJ, the CL-415 "super scooper" water bomber.
The multiplier keeps working: Saab GlobalEye AWACS, just bought by France, uses Bombardier Global 6500 airframes -- airframes evolved directly from the CRJ ( Canadair Regional Jet ); the CL-415 "super scooper", now in much demand for fighting wild fires, is being updated by DeHavillandCanada as the DHC-515.
Sweden has been consistently steadfast about making its own jets. Partnering with Saab on GripenE puts Canada in position to help develop the next generation of jets, which could then also be built in Canada once the final GripenE rolls off the line.