To cancel or not to cancel.
This is the conundrum that Canada’s new prime minister, Mark Carney, confronts while poised to call a federal election that will likely be defined by and fought over one question: Who do Canadians trust to take on a bully American president intent on turning a sovereign country into, officially, a US state?
Beyond the tit-for-tat tariffs being imposed in what threatens to be an escalating and punitive trade war between Canada and the United States, another prickly flashpoint has emerged.
It constitutes the first “test” of Carney’s promised commitment to weaning the nation he hopes to lead for years, not weeks, from its long, ingrained dependence on a dominant southern neighbour.
Carney is being pressed by usually disparate and antagonistic forces along Canada’s narrow political spectrum to abandon the remainder of a $19bn deal – engineered belatedly by his predecessor, Justin Trudeau – to buy an additional 62 US-made and maintained F-35 fighter jets.
Canada has already paid for 16 warplanes, which are due to be delivered by early next year.
Conservative pundits writing for conservative newspapers have joined former Liberal foreign minister, Lloyd Axworthy, and peace and disarmament groups in urging the prime minister to “stand up to” America’s mercurial commander-in-chief, Donald Trump.
To wit, they are demanding Carney follow Portugal’s lead and axe the planned purchase of the extra technically troubled jets as a tangible expression of Canada’s rejection of Trump’s imperial designs, as well as a stinging financial and diplomatic defence of the besieged confederation’s autonomy.
Axworthy told a television interviewer recently that it would “be a mistake to continue” with the acquisition of F-35 jets.
Instead, he argued, Canada should “push back” against a belligerent president who has “kicked us in the teeth”.
“I think this is an opportunity for us to say,” Axworthy suggested. “Do we … want our military so entangled with the American military that our discretion and independence of movement are limited?”
It is odd that, in 2025, Axworthy would challenge Canada to embrace the “opportunity” to distance itself from the US militarily when a succession of Liberal and Conservative prime ministers has, from 1945 on, fused the continental “junior partner’s” armed forces to the Pentagon’s sprawling defence infrastructure like conjoined twins.
In any event, a suddenly liberated Axworthy also pointed out that the “digital box” housing the operating software for the warplanes is controlled by the giant US arms manufacturer, Lockheed Martin.
The fear is that a vindictive Trump could order the aerospace and “defence” contractor to deny Canada access to any software upgrades that would enable the jets’ lethal capabilities in flight.
These appeals, anchored as they are in guarding the Maple Leaf and all the emotions Canada’s distinctive red and white national flag conjures up, have struck a nationalistic chord with many Canadians who have been seized by a “buy home-made” movement that is gathering enthusiasm and momentum.
Carney, the former central banker turned politician, has been obliged, of course, to respond to the prevailing patriotic winds in the hopes that they propel him and the Liberal Party to victory.
So, it was hardly surprising when Defence Minister Bill Blair announced late last week that Ottawa would “re-examine” its contract with Lockheed Martin and look for European alternatives to the F-35 jets.
The “review” of the existing deal has allowed Carney to claim the “Canada first” ground and has afforded him time to consider the possible implications and consequences of cancelling it outright.
At the risk of offending loyal readers and startling my easily agitated detractors, I think Carney’s predictable, carve-out-some-convenient-time gambit is, in light of the uncertain geopolitical circumstances, the prudent thing to do.
Let me share two other observations that are meant to provide some useful context for the prescriptions I am about to offer Carney on how he should address this delicate and potentially combustible cross-border dispute.
First, if I had my druthers, I would forgo acquiring warplanes that, in a generation or so, will become obsolete, and spend the mountain of money improving young Canadians’ fast-fading prospects of buying a home on the not-so-distant horizon and burnishing the paltry pension that seniors receive every month.
But I know that any future Liberal or Conservative government will be dedicated – as institutional gospel – to replacing Canada’s ageing roster of CF-18 fighter jets.
The question now, in light of Trump’s oafish and disrespectful threats, is whose name will be on the big cheque to supply those warplanes?
Second, I doubt that Carney and his pared-down cabinet are going to be swayed by my advice – if they read it at all. The Bank of Canada’s ex-chairman has spent much of his career tuning out the loud, often ill-informed noise, produced by members of the know-it-all commentariat, including me.
Still, since this is an “opinion” column, here is my view of how Carney ought to navigate the fraught quandary he faces.
I believe that Carney – and by extension, Canada – should keep our valuable chips close by rather than going all in.
Trump may enjoy a strong hand, but, despite his bluster and bravado, he is a bad poker player – prone to making short-sighted and impulsive bets that do more damage than good to US interests.
Carney must be patient and exploit the long game to his advantage by using the pending F-35 procurement as leverage during rancorous tariff negotiations that could well prevail throughout Trump’s chaotic, four-year term as president.
As a necessary corollary, Carney needs to rebuff myopic writers and historians demanding that he nix, forthwith, the F-35s in favour of the Swedish-built Saab Gripen to mollify his chirping critics inside and outside Parliament and editorial boards more interested in “decisive” acts than calm rejoinders.
Given Trump’s coercive modus operandi and impetuous nature, there are no guarantees that this more cautious approach will be persuasive or dampen the president’s retributive instincts.
It is worth a try. And, to bolster the chances of success, it should be coupled with a deliberate and sustained effort to tamp down the chest-thumping rhetoric that only serves, apparently, to trigger a petulant president.
Then there are the impracticality and prohibitive costs associated with opting for a mixed fleet of jets in Canada’s airborne arsenal.
Reportedly, Canadian defence planners have insisted for decades that this cockeyed strategy would prove too expensive. Two warplanes would require two training regimes, two supply chains, and separate hangars.
Keep your Cheshire-like cool and hold on to your shiny, expensive bargaining chips, Prime Minister Carney, until you, not temperamental Trump, can win the lucrative pot.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
