Concerns about reliance on the United States for critical military technology, such as the F-35 fighter jet, can lead countries to consider alternatives like the Saab JAS 39 Gripen Here’s how the security of the Gripen might compare to the F-35 if a nation cannot fully trust the United States: 1. US control and influence F-35: The United States maintains significant control over the F-35, including its sensitive technology and software. Export partners are generally forbidden from modifying the jet or its software, and the US has the ability to dictate who can fly it. The US can also restrict the sale of the F-35 based on political considerations, including a country’s relationships with rivals or its use of equipment that could compromise the jet. Access to the necessary operational codes to make the F-35 function is controlled by the US (and the UK as a level 1 partner), according to Quora. Gripen: While the Gripen does use some US-made components, such as the General Electric engine, Saab emphasizes the greater independence offered to operators. They highlight technology-transfer agreements and customization options that can include local suppliers in manufacturing and support processes. Operators also have access to the Gripen’s source code and technical documentation, enabling independent upgrades and the integration of new equipment. 2. Potential vulnerabilities F-35: The high degree of US control over the F-35 raises concerns about the potential for a nation’s F-35 fleet to be affected by changes in US foreign policy or potential disagreements. As noted on Quora, a nation could theoretically face a situation where the US might restrict access to the codes needed to operate their F-35 fleet, grounding their jets. There is no remote “kill switch”, however, that the US can use to disable F-35s operated by partner nations, according to Quora. Gripen: Although the Gripen’s reliance on a US-built engine still means it’s not entirely free from potential US influence, the greater level of technological independence and local industrial involvement could reduce the vulnerability to external pressures compared to the F-35. 3. Operational considerations F-35: The F-35, a 5th-generation stealth fighter, offers advanced capabilities in evading enemy air defenses, according to the National Security Journal. However, it requires significant infrastructure and maintenance, making it less suitable for dispersed operations or in scenarios where airfields are targeted. Gripen: The Gripen, a lighter, more economical fighter, emphasizes adaptability and ease of maintenance, with the ability to operate from shorter runways and even roads. This can be a significant advantage in situations where traditional airbases are vulnerable or for nations with more limited defense budgets. In essence, the choice between the Gripen and the F-35 can involve a trade-off between advanced capabilities and independence from a major power like the United States. If a country prioritizes minimizing reliance on the United States and maintaining greater control over its air force, the Gripen, with its emphasized independence and adaptability, could be perceived as a more secure option despite its lack of stealth capabilities and some US-made components