Spain rejects F-35; Swiss contract pressured by tariffs

Spain’s decision to step away from the F-35 clarifies its path toward European-made fighters. Officials signaled focus on Eurofighter today and FCAS tomorrow, aligning capabilities with industrial sovereignty and workshare priorities while simplifying sustainment choices for the air force.

In Switzerland, a signed F-35 contract remains on the books but faces rising cross‑party pressure after the U.S. imposed a 39% tariff on Swiss exports. Lawmakers are weighing costs, penalties, and delivery timelines against political blowback and industrial alignment concerns.

Spain’s Europe-first turn

Madrid has ruled out the F-35 and is choosing between Eurofighter upgrades and the Franco‑German‑Spanish FCAS roadmap. The approach keeps core design influence and maintenance chains in Europe while retaining NATO interoperability through shared munitions and common training.

Budget and sustainment logic favor standardizing around a European fleet. That reduces training complexity and lifecycle costs and strengthens leverage on software access, future upgrades, and domestic industry roles across avionics and mission systems.

Spain’s stance also reflects a broader EU push to reinforce the continental defense base. It balances near‑term readiness with long‑term sixth‑generation ambitions, targeting smoother transition risk as legacy aircraft retire.

Did you know?
Switzerland’s 2021 referendum backing new fighter financing passed by less than one percentage point, leaving the program politically exposed.

Switzerland’s tariff shock

Bern’s 36‑jet F-35A purchase, finalized in 2022, is now a flashpoint. The 39% U.S. tariff hardened domestic opposition and revived calls for cancellation or a new referendum. Critics question proceeding with a major U.S. buy amid punitive trade measures and rising cost sensitivities.

Backers warn that reversal could trigger penalties and slip air policing timelines as legacy fleets age. They also emphasize interoperability benefits and shared upgrades across Europe’s growing F-35 user base, which could lower long‑run risk.

Politics and procurement risk

Trade frictions and headline reactions risk distorting multi‑decade procurement plans. Defense ministries must weigh legal obligations, delivery schedules, and lifecycle cost realism against short‑cycle political pressure that can reshape terms and currency exposure.

Switzerland’s review talk underscores contract law realities. Any pivot would need clear modeling of termination costs, offset adjustments, and bridge capabilities to prevent air defense gaps before a replacement choice becomes operational.

ALSO READ | Starmer opposes Israel’s Gaza push, backs aid and hostage release

Capability trade‑offs

The F-35 offers sensor fusion, low observability, and a wide coalition ecosystem for upgrades and training. Constraints include strict tech protections and sustainment models that can limit local autonomy and complicate national customization over time.

European options promise deeper industry participation and software control but may require careful planning to match mission needs, particularly for stealth‑heavy scenarios and combined air operations in contested environments.

What to watch next

In Spain, implementation details on Eurofighter upgrades and the FCAS schedule will shape capability pacing and industrial returns. In Switzerland, parliamentary moves, legal assessments of penalties, and any renegotiation signals will determine whether the contract holds or shifts.

Europe’s fighter choices now sit at the intersection of sovereignty, alliance needs, and trade politics. The outcome will influence industrial strategy and deterrence for years, making clarity, credible costing, and disciplined timelines decisive.