Portugal has abruptly halted its planned purchase of U.S.-made F-35 fighter jets, pivoting to the Canadian-built Saab Gripen E amid mounting political tensions sparked by former President Trump’s aggressive threats toward Canada. This seismic shift sends shockwaves through NATO and challenges Washington’s influence over allied defense procurement.

Portugal, a founding NATO member since 1949, has long relied on aging F-16 fighters, prompting a necessary replacement with next-generation aircraft. Initially, the Lockheed Martin F-35 seemed the uncontested choice, with financing and industrial talks well underway by 2024. The situation changed dramatically as political pressure from Washington escalated.

Donald Trump’s return to the White House in 2026 brought a confrontational stance toward Canada, including public warnings tied directly to Canada’s defense dealings and fighter jet procurement. These overt threats triggered alarm bells in Lisbon, forcing Portuguese defense officials to reassess risks linked to the F-35’s U.S.-dependent supply and maintenance ecosystem.

For Portugal, the F-35 is more than a fighter jet—it’s a tightly managed American defense system reliant on U.S. software updates, mission data control, spare parts, and export approvals. Sensitivity to political volatility, especially seen in threats aimed at close ally Canada, surfaced as a material risk factor in Portugal’s defense strategy evaluations.

Consequently, Lisbon halted its F-35 evaluation and accelerated negotiations with Saab for the Gripen E, whose final assembly occurs in Canada. This move grants Portugal a NATO-compatible fighter without the geopolitical vulnerability stemming from American export controls, assuring greater operational independence in times of tension or diplomatic discord.

The proposed Portuguese fleet would involve 18 to 24 Gripen E jets, replacing the F-16s between 2029 and 2032 with full NATO interoperability. Estimated program costs hover around €2.5 to €3 billion, including weapons integration, pilot training, simulators, and infrastructure upgrades, marking a cost-effective alternative amid tight defense budgets.

Beyond initial acquisition, operating expenses appear dramatically lower for the Gripen—approximately $8,000 per flight hour versus $35,000 for the F-35—potentially saving billions over a 30-year lifespan. These savings could be redirected into munitions, training, and modernization, enhancing Portugal’s long-term military readiness and fiscal sustainability.

Technical design favors the Gripen’s modularity and simplified maintenance, enabling Portuguese technicians to service jets domestically through European supply chains. Engine sourcing via European partners further reduces exposure to American regulatory frameworks, thus safeguarding Portugal’s air force from supply disruptions tied to U.S. political fluctuations.

The Gripen’s software architecture offers Portugal sovereign control over mission data and upgrade schedules without requiring centralized American approval. This autonomy contrasts sharply with the F-35’s tightly controlled U.S.-managed digital ecosystem, where software revisions depend heavily on American oversight, a critical factor in modern combat capability.

NATO interoperability remains uncompromised; the Gripen integrates with alliance data links, participates in joint exercises, and supports a wide range of Western munitions without the lengthy approval processes associated with non-European weaponry on the F-35. This flexibility adds tangible strategic value for a mid-sized NATO air force balancing cost and alliance commitments.

Lockheed Martin faces a setback losing Portugal’s potential order of up to two dozen jets, but the deeper consequence is the precedent set. Portugal, a key NATO founder, signaling political risks behind the American fighter’s ecosystem, provides a cautionary tale resonating across European defense circles, from Spain to Germany and Italy.

Spain, facing its own fighter replacement decisions, and Italy, balancing budget and fleet size debates, now observe Portugal’s example as a viable non-American alternative within NATO frameworks. Similarly, Germany and France see Portugal’s move as validation for pursuing diversified procurement while maintaining alliance coherence and European strategic autonomy.

Canada’s Montreal-based Saab assembly hub gains unprecedented validation, evolving from a national asset to a crucial NATO supply node. With eight countries operating variants of the Gripen, Portugal’s order strengthens the industrial base, reduces unit costs, and enhances transatlantic defense collaboration independent of U.S. political influence.

The political dimension is inseparable from the strategic: Washington’s attempts to coerce allies by leveraging defense and trade relations backfire, driving partners like Portugal to safeguard operational autonomy. Even the possibility of supply chain disruptions outweighed the F-35’s advance

d capabilities in Lisbon’s risk calculus, prioritizing stability over stealth.

Meanwhile, in a domestic rebuke to President Trump, the U.S. House narrowly passed legislation to end tariffs on Canada, signaling cracks within the Republican majority amid economic pressures and upcoming elections. This legislative defiance against Trump underscores the growing costs of aggressive trade policies towards key allies.

Trump’s warnings political consequences for Republicans opposing tariffs fueled further tension, yet bipartisan votes underscored rising voter concerns about the economic impact of strained U.S.-Canada relations. The vote, though vulnerable to a presidential veto, spotlights fractures in executive-legislative alignment over trade and foreign policy measures.

Together, Portugal’s fighter jet shift and the U.S. tariff reversal encapsulate an alliance-wide reevaluation of dependence on concentrated American power—in defense supply chains and economic ties alike. Pressure tactics intended to assert control have provoked countermoves reinforcing partners’ desire for diversification and sovereignty.

The fallout ripples through NATO’s operational cohesion, intelligence sharing, and defense planning. Lisbon’s decision highlights an urgent need to balance interoperability with mutual respect and political independence, raising important questions about the future architecture of Western military and strategic partnerships.

Portugal’s cancellation of the F-35 procurement in favor of the Canadian-built Gripen E marks a pivotal moment, reflecting a shifting geopolitical landscape shaped by high-stakes political brinkmanship. Allies and industry leaders alike now watch whether others will follow Lisbon’s lead, reshaping NATO’s fighter fleet composition and alliance dynamics.

As Washington confronts internal political challenges and external strategic consequences, this episode reveals the complex interplay between defense technology, political alliances, and national sovereignty. The coming months will test the resilience of transatlantic cooperation amid evolving threats and shifting power balances.

Portugal’s decisive move signals a broader realignment toward diversification and autonomy within NATO. It challenges the assumption that member states must uniformly rely on American defense platforms, introducing new trajectories for how alliances manage risk, maintain readiness, and uphold strategic independence.

This breakthrough underscores a growing recognition that defense relationships hinge not only on capabilities but on trust, reliability, and the absence of coercion. Portugal’s experience serves as a cautionary example and a potential blueprint for allies reassessing their long-term strategic partnerships against an increasingly unpredictable geopolitical backdrop.

The ramifications extend far beyond Lisbon’s hangars, echoing through capitals across Europe and North America. Portugal’s Gripen E commitment and the U.S. congressional tariff revolt together highlight a critical juncture for transatlantic relations, where sovereignty, economic interests, and defense readiness all hang in a delicate balance.