New fighter jets have no 'useful military role'

Of all the things Canadians want from their government, my guess is that new military fighter jets would probably rank close to last.

But new fighter jets are what we're getting. Despite the enduring popularity of peacekeeping among Canadians, the Harper government continues to ramp up war-oriented military spending, most recently with its announcement of plans to buy 65 F-35 fighter jets from Lockheed Martin.

At $16 billion -- and that's a conservative estimate; cost overruns are rampant with military contracts -- the jets promise to be the most expensive military acquisition in Canadian history.

What makes this purchase bizarre is how little use the jets will be, unless we're waging all-out war.

"It's hard to see any useful military role for the F-35," wrote Leonard Johnson, a retired major-general in the Canadian air force and former commandant of the National Defence College in Kingston. "The age of major inter-state war between developed nations has vanished, so why prepare for one?"

Now, some might consider Johnson's argument suspect; despite his impressive military credentials, he has a soft spot for peace.

Perhaps we should consult someone more resolutely committed to war -- like Defence Minister Peter MacKay. Yet even MacKay struggles to explain the utility of the jets.

Asked at a news conference last month for "specific examples of the uses of these aircraft," MacKay mostly focused on what a great recruiting device they make.

"[I]t helps a great deal, I can assure you, in recruiting, to have new gear, new equipment, that is state of the art," MacKay said. "That is a very important part of our regeneration of personnel and pilots in particular. So having that platform capacity is something that is of great importance to the continued growth of the Canadian Forces and the development of our pilots."

So we're spending $16 billion -- about $470 for every Canadian -- so we can have planes that are really attractive to pilots? Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper just to offer every prospective pilot a Porsche?

MacKay's answer is also striking in that he indicates that the ultimate purpose is to ensure "the continued growth of the Canadian Forces."

Why should the continued growth of the military be a goal in itself? Why would we even want an ever-bigger military?

As former U.S. president Dwight Eisenhower famously warned, a massive military combined with a large arms industry forms a "military-industrial complex" that is likely to exert "unwarranted influence" over the country.

The F-35 purchase is being touted for its job creation benefits. Although the planes will be built in the U.S., with no buy-Canadian requirements, Canadian military contractors are expected to win lucrative contracts for parts.

But if job creation is the goal, why not invest directly in Canadian jobs building things we actually need - like public transit, clean energy and improved health-care and education systems?

Investing in the F-35 is at best a roundabout way to create jobs, and one that transforms Canada into a more war-oriented economy, where prosperity becomes tied to fighting wars.

With Canada's role in Afghanistan scheduled to end next year, our military expenditures should be dropping - and not a moment too soon, as the country struggles with recession and deficits.

But anyone who thinks that our Afghanistan exit might free up money for other Canadian priorities has obviously forgotten about our pressing need to lure pilots with shiny new equipment.

Linda McQuaig is author of It's the Crude, Dude: War, Big Oil and the Fight for the Planet.

"The world needs to hear a lot less from the mainstream media, and a lot more from" says Linda McQuaig. We agree Linda! Help us spread the word by becoming a member of ( and get your own new set of words in the form of a magazine subscription.

Related Items

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable. has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.