US President Donald Trump with Lockheed Martin director and chief test of the F-35 in 2018 in Washington.
Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
The Federal Department of Defense has continued to ensure that Switzerland would receive 36 F-35 fighter planes for a fixed amount of 6 billion francs. Today, the United States demands several hundred additional millions. Here are the main questions raised by this file.
Why is the F-35A more expensive than what had been announced?
The American government requires a higher price. To justify this, he invokes the increase in material costs and increases. This strongly contrasts with the repeated declarations of the former Defense Minister Viola Amherd, who assured that Switzerland would benefit from a fixed price for these devices. The latter resigned in March 2025.
Bern, however, camps on his position, saying that a fixed price had been agreed. For their part, the American authorities speak of “misunderstanding”. As contracts exclude any legal recourse, Switzerland is now trying to resolve this dispute through diplomatic route.
According to the United States, the Swiss order only becomes legally restrictive when the production of planes begins. This is when the price is definitely set. In other words, the “fixed price” mentioned in the contracts only concerns the effective order for the launch of production, and not the entire acquisition project.
According to Switzerland estimates, this dispute would result in an additional cost of 650 million to 1.3 billion francs compared to the initial offer.
Already in May 2022, federal finance control had noted during an audit that there was a “legal uncertainty concerning the concept of fixed price for acquisition”. The Defense Department vehemently rejected this warning by referring to its own expertise.
What motivated the decision in favor of the F-35?
In 2014, the Swiss people refused to acquire Gripen combat aircraft. In order to have more chance of winning the next vote, the Confederation posed in 2020 than the question of principle to know whether to buy a new fighting plane. The Swiss responded positively to this question (50.1%), 8,670 votes having tipped the scale.
The Swiss abroad then rejected the purchase at more than 56%. Some believe that if all expatriate people had received their voting equipment in time, the vote could have changed. However, it is not possible to prove it.
After the people of the people, the Department of Defense launched an assessment to compare four models of plane, including the French Rafale and the American combat aircraft F-35A. “The F-35 clearly imposed itself thanks to its advantageous acquisition and exploitation costs,” said Defense Minister Viola Amherd in June 2021. From the point of view of acquisitions, the cost-utility report is the relevant parameter. It was the latter who finally tipped the scales.
Has the electoral body been deceived?
In any case not deliberately. Environments and voters voted for a framework for an acquisition that did not indicate the number or the type of aircraft. If the 36 planes are now more expensive, Switzerland could theoretically buy less, as recognized by the Swiss Minister of Defense Martin Pfister during a press conference. However, it is not known for the moment if the contracts allow and at what cost.
The people made their decision as part of a referendum. During the ballot, the 6 billion francs were indicated with the national consumer price index of 2018. It was therefore clear that at the time of payment, the amount would be suitable for Swiss increases. The amount approved by the people is equivalent today to nearly 6.4 billion francs.
An F-35 during a demonstration flight in Le Bourget, north of Paris, in 2023.
Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
The citizens were later deceived, when the authorities have continued to repeat that Switzerland bought the jet at a fixed price. However, even the American embassy in Bern had confirmed it, the purchase managers believed in it.
Is a new vote necessary?
Not necessarily, but there could still be a second referendum on this issue. Last week, the Socialist Party (PS) filed two motions of the same content with the federal chambers. It requires that in the event of a fixed price or additional costs, parliament – and potentially the people – can decide again.
The PS does not specify for the moment what exactly the question would be asked. The party stresses that he does not ask “any new assessment of the purchase as such”.
The Minister of Defense at the time, Viola Amherd, during the 2021 press conference on the decision concerning the F-35.
Keystone / Alessandro Della Valle
Representatives of the PS and the Greens also study an appeal against the 2020 vote. The two parties want any additional credit to be the subject of a popular vote.
The Department of Defense is trying to finance additional costs via already approved budgets. He thus wants to avoid an additional credit which should first be approved by Parliament and which would expose the file to political turbulence.
Can competitors discarded file a complaint?
It does not seem excluded. The decision to choose the American plane to the detriment of the French Rafale of the manufacturer Dassault Aviation had already caused diplomatic tensions with France. Paris still negotiated prices with certain members of the Swiss government, while Viola Amherd had already decided in favor of the F-35. This decision left traces.
Swiss public procurement law and the total estimated costs of the jet are legally decisive. Switzerland has calculated that the acquisition and operation of the aircraft would cost 15.5 billion francs over a period of use of 30 years. “The second most advantageous plane was about two billion more expensive,” said Viola Amherd in 2021.
With the now known additional costs, the gap with the other candidates seems less decisive.
Why is the F-35 controversial?
The F-35A is considered an expensive purchase and maintenance device. Several countries that have acquired the American jet have seen the invoice climb. In Canada, for example, the price increased from 19 to 27.7 billion dollars during the acquisition. In Norway, operating costs over 30 years should represent the purchase price 2.5 times, while Switzerland does not even apply a factor 2. In Denmark also, operating costs are 50% higher than expected.
The F-35 is also debated for strategic reasons. Some suspect the United States of keeping ultimate control over the device, via a hypothetical “Kill Switch” which would deactivate the jets at a distance. “If the United States attacked Greenland, no European country would be able to take off its F-35 to defend it,” the former French military intelligence leader recently on this subject.
Others question the very usefulness of such a plane in the era of air wars waged by drones. The American billionaire Elon Musk distinguished himself by his criticism on this subject. “Let’s stop, please the F-35 program with the worst military value for money in history,” he wroteExternal link on X.
What are the options that remain in Switzerland?
If the Confederation has to finance additional costs through additional credit, we should expect violent political debates and possibly delays. The DDPS therefore tries to avoid this scenario. It remains to be seen whether the additional costs can be absorbed by “contractual optimizations” or by re -examining other defense projects.
As a last resort, Switzerland could consider a breach of the contract, if only by pure negotiation tactics. The financial consequences of such a decision are, however, unpredictable. Nearly 700 million francs have already been paid to the United States, and an additional 300 million must be this year. However, Bern is currently in negotiations with Washington on other files, including customs duties, and is to preserve good bilateral relations.
Socialist and green politicians in charge of security nevertheless require to consider an immediate abandonment of the project. “If getting out of the contract is cheaper than staying there, it is high time to stop the costs,” says national environmental advisor Balthasar Glättli.
Is it the first scandal linked to the purchase of a fighting aircraft?
No. In recent decades, Switzerland has often lost control of the costs of its air arms programs, especially because of costly adaptations to Swiss needs, the famous “Helvetisations”.
The acquisition of Mirage III in 1964 is an emblematic example: to be able to house the jet in mountain hangars, it had to be transformed at great cost, resulting in an additional cost of two thirds of the initial price. Result: the number of planes has been reduced by 100 to 57. Resignations followed.
More recently, the purchase of hermes 900 hfe drones has experienced drifts: the cost of six units increased from 250 to 300 million francs. To be able to fly them over the Alps, Switzerland even plans to integrate a diesel engine.
Plus
Plus
The seven problems of the Swiss army
This content was published on
07 Feb. 2025
The Swiss army is not at best its form. The point on the main challenges it must take up.
Read more the seven problems of the Swiss army
Rely and verified by Samuel Jaberg / Translated from German with the help of automatic translation tools / KROs
