Evaluating The Risk That The U.S. Could Disable Its 5th Gen Fighter Jets In European Hands: A Deep Dive On The F-35's ''kill switch'' concerns.

NATO’s Dependence on the F-35 Amidst US Geopolitical Shifts.

• At a time when President Trump openly taunts the United Kingdom on whether it can face Russia alone, refuses to provide explicit assurances for NATO allies in Ukraine, and threatens the invasion and annexation of Greenland and even NATO territory—including Canada, one of the United States’ closest and most loyal allies—the concerns among European partners regarding military reliance on the United States have reached a critical juncture.

• Against this backdrop, it is hardly surprising that European allies are now questioning their heavy dependence on advanced U.S. military technology, particularly in the realm of air power.

• (side note: and turns out EU’s recently announced $165bn loan-based rapid rearmament plan will not include spending on U.S. defense contractors and hardware.)

The Strategic Role of the F-35 in NATO Operations.

• One of the most critical vulnerabilities in NATO’s reliance on U.S. military technology lies in its dependence on the F-35 fighter jet, which is deeply integrated across numerous NATO air forces.

• The F-35 is an essential capability for NATO’s strategic deterrence, allowing allied nations to conduct deep-strike operations while evading advanced surface-to-air radars—particularly against platforms such as Russia’s S-400 missile defense system.

• The importance of the F-35 cannot be overstated.

• It is one of the very few platforms that can deliver high payloads with precision behind enemy lines, evading radar detection.

• This capability provides NATO forces with a significant advantage in any high-intensity conflict by enabling:

• 1. Destruction of Russia’s ballistic missile launchers and other critical military infrastructure;

• 2. Suppression and Destruction (SEAD AND DEAD missions) of advanced air defense systems, allowing NATO forces to achieve air superiority in a potential confrontation.

• 3. Nuclear strike capability, as the F-35 is capable of carrying nuclear weapons under NATO’s nuclear-sharing arrangements.

• Given the F-35’s role in securing air superiority and maintaining strategic deterrence, it is understandable why many European allies are now reassessing the risks associated with relying on this singular U.S. platform.

The Kill Switch Concern: A Potential U.S. Control Mechanism?

• One of the primary concerns among NATO allies is whether the United States retains the ability to remotely disable F-35 aircraft through a so-called “kill switch”—a mechanism that could prevent these fighter jets from operating in a scenario where the U.S. does not approve of a particular mission.

• We shall do a deep dive analysis on the risk later below.

• But even if an explicit “kill switch” did not exist, several operational dependencies on the U.S. could already restrict independent European military actions:

• 1) Software and Systems Updates: The F-35 relies on continuous updates from the U.S., meaning Washington could effectively withhold critical software patches or operational data, rendering aircraft non-operational.

• 2) Logistics and Maintenance Dependence: The F-35’s Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) ensures fleet-wide maintenance and performance monitoring but is controlled by the U.S., potentially giving Washington an indirect mechanism of control over operational readiness.

• 3) Weapons Integration: Many European air forces depend on U.S.-made munitions for their F-35 fleets, creating an additional layer of dependency on American supply chains.

• As European nations grow wary of these risks, discussions about alternative procurement strategies and potential domestic fighter programs—such as the Franco-German-Spanish FCAS (Future Combat Air System) and the British-Italian-Japanese Tempest project—are gaining traction.

• And several NATO countries have taken more explicit steps to question the reliability of the F-35 program.

• Canada, under the leadership of Prime Minister Mark Carney, is reconsidering its contract to purchase 88 F-35 fighter jets from Lockheed Martin, a deal valued at approximately C$19 billion.

• Naturally, Trump’s endless repetition of his desire to annex Canada is the main cause for this…

• But Canada is not alone: Portugal is also reconsidering its plans to replace its aging F-16 fleet with F-35s due to concerns over the current U.S. administration's policies toward NATO allies.

• Defense Minister Nuno Melo emphasized the importance of considering the geopolitical environment in defense procurement decisions, reflecting apprehensions about future access to maintenance and parts for the F-35s.

Turkey’s Contrarian Position: Seeking Reentry into the F-35 Program.

• While most European nations are expressing concerns over their dependence on U.S. military technology, Turkey has taken a somewhat divergent approach.

• In his first phone call with President Trump, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan actively pushed for Turkey’s reentry into the F-35 program—a program from which Ankara was previously suspended due to its purchase of Russia’s S-400 air defense systems.

• The initial exclusion of Turkey from the F-35 program was based on concerns that integration of the Russian S-400 system could compromise the F-35’s stealth capabilities, potentially allowing Moscow to collect critical intelligence on the jet’s radar signature and vulnerabilities.

• Despite this, Erdoğan’s renewed push for participation in the F-35 program appears to be driven more by political maneuvering than immediate military necessity.

• At a time when Erdoğan is increasingly positioning Turkey as a pro-European and pro-Ukrainian actor, advocating for Turkey’s return to the F-35 program serves multiple purposes:

• 1. Balancing ties between Washington and Ankara—By requesting F-35 reentry, Erdoğan signals strong trust in U.S.-Turkey military cooperation, even as Europe questions American reliability.

• 2. Reaffirming NATO Commitment—As Turkey distances itself from Russian defense ties and emerges as a key supplier of military aid to Ukraine, Erdoğan’s stance reinforces Ankara’s position within the NATO framework.

• 3. Gaining Leverage with Washington—By emphasizing Turkey’s strategic importance to NATO and its trust in U.S. military technology, Erdoğan positions Turkey as a more reliable partner than some European allies, potentially securing additional defense cooperation and concessions.

• In addition, Erdogan is offering a ‘‘social proof’’ for Trump - demonstrating commitment to their ‘‘good relations’’ and making it clear that Trump is still in good graces with serious world leaders beyond the usual UK, Israel (and now, Putin..)

• (side note: and this goodwill and leverage will be needed to persuade Washington to rein in Israel in Syria.)

• Finally, it is also worth noting that unlike other NATO members, Turkey is the only other NATO country that has its own 5th Generation stealth fighter jet: KAAN.

• (side note: it is very unlikely that KAAN is comparable to F-35 in its performance. Firstly, mainly due to F-35s head start in data and intel collection and being plugged into the U.S. ISR capabilities. But with that said, built with components sourced from the Western defense contractors (like BAE and Rolls Royce) it is likely better than (or at least very comparable to) Russia’s or China’s versions of 5th Gen)

Deep Dive: Does the F-35 Have a Kill Switch?