Parliamentary watchdog condemns Swiss handling of F-35 fighter deal

Switzerland’s parliamentary watchdog has found that the government never secured the fixed price used to justify the country’s F-35 purchase. The finding strikes at the centre of a procurement programme that has already forced Bern to seek hundreds of millions of francs in extra funding.

In a report published on September 8, 2026, the National Council’s parliamentary oversight body, known as the GPK-N, said no flat-rate fixed price had been agreed with the United States for the 36 F-35A fighter jets. The committee said this made the defence ministry’s categorical assurances to parliament and the public difficult to understand.

The ministry had repeatedly presented the aircraft deal as a CHF 6 billion purchase at a fixed price. A year ago, the government acknowledged that the arrangement could not be maintained and requested a supplementary credit of just under CHF 400 million, equivalent to about $495 million. It later said the higher costs meant Switzerland could buy only around 30 aircraft.

The report shifts the dispute from a question of rising prices to one of administrative responsibility. It identifies weaknesses in negotiation management, internal oversight and the flow of information, placing the F-35 programme under renewed scrutiny in Bern.

The GPK-N says the defence ministry entered critical talks without a clear negotiating mandate. That omission left officials without a documented framework for protecting Switzerland’s position as the United States revised the financial terms.

The committee also criticised the size and structure of the negotiating group. According to the 95-page report, a very small number of people supervised the talks, while the ministry failed to manage the process closely enough. Information did not move adequately through the administration or to the political authorities responsible for oversight.

The report’s most pointed criticism concerns internal controls. “In certain phases, even the most basic form of oversight was lacking,” it said, referring specifically to a simple dual-control principle. In practice, that means key decisions and information were not consistently checked by a second responsible official or body.

The committee’s findings do not establish that the United States breached a signed flat-rate contract. They establish that Swiss authorities presented the arrangement with a level of certainty that the underlying agreement did not support. That distinction matters for public finance, because parliament approved the programme on the basis of the government’s assurances about cost and scope.

The GPK-N described the organisation of the negotiations as inappropriate, adding to pressure on the defence ministry to explain who knew what, and when.

The proposed Swiss fleet has already fallen from 36 aircraft to around 30 as the bill rises. The change puts a precise number on the consequences of the failed price arrangement, even though the final cost and procurement timetable remain subject to further decisions.

The original programme covered 36 US-made F-35A fighter jets for CHF 6 billion. After the United States sought additional payments, the government asked parliament for almost CHF 400 million in supplementary funding. The extra credit was intended to cover costs claimed by the US, according to the source report.

The government subsequently announced that the additional burden would reduce the number of aircraft Switzerland could procure to around 30. That represents roughly six fewer jets than the original plan, although the source does not provide a final delivery schedule or a definitive revised total price.

The dispute has revived the controversy that accompanied the F-35 decision in 2021, when Swiss voters narrowly approved the purchase of new fighter aircraft. The programme, known as Air2030, was designed to replace ageing F/A-18 and F-5 aircraft and strengthen Switzerland’s air defence.

For parliament, the immediate issue is whether the procurement can still deliver the military capability presented to voters and lawmakers while staying within a politically acceptable budget.

The report names former Defence Minister Viola Amherd and former Air2030 project manager Darko Savic among the figures linked to the procurement’s failures. Both left their posts in spring 2025, before the full extent of the additional costs became public.

The GPK-N’s findings place responsibility across the administrative chain rather than focusing only on the final price dispute. The committee examined the chronology of the negotiations and identified shortcomings in preparation, supervision and information sharing. It was particularly critical that the defence ministry had not set a negotiating mandate before talks with Washington began.

The timing has intensified political scrutiny. The government’s earlier public statements treated the CHF 6 billion figure as a firm ceiling, while the later request for almost CHF 400 million exposed a gap between the political message and the negotiating reality. The committee said it could not understand the categorical assurances given to parliament and the public.

The source report does not state that the former officials personally authorised an unlawful payment or that they were found responsible for every decision in the programme. It records criticism of the way the procurement was organised and managed during their tenure.

The findings leave parliament to assess whether existing procurement rules provide enough protection when Switzerland negotiates major defence contracts with a foreign supplier.

Switzerland must now reconcile a smaller planned fleet with the capability and cost promises made when Air2030 was approved. The GPK-N report gives parliament a detailed record of the failures, but it does not settle the procurement’s next financial or military steps.

The government will have to explain how it intends to proceed after acknowledging that the original price could not be maintained. That includes clarifying the status of the supplementary credit, the number of aircraft to be delivered and the effect of the reduction from 36 jets to around 30 on air-policing and air-defence planning.

The political stakes reach beyond the defence ministry. The F-35 programme is one of Switzerland’s largest recent public purchases, and its handling will influence how parliament evaluates future military contracts. Clear mandates, documented reporting lines and independent checks are likely to become central demands in the follow-up debate.

The GPK-N’s criticism also tests the government’s relationship with the public. Swiss voters approved the purchase in 2021 after a campaign focused on replacing ageing aircraft and maintaining national security. They were not voting on an open-ended commitment to absorb costs that officials had described as fixed.

The committee’s report now gives lawmakers a basis to demand answers from the administration, while the defence ministry faces the task of restoring confidence in a programme whose price and scale have both changed.