Twenty-seven former rebels are being deployed as community mobilisers in the Tchomia locality of Ituri Province to promote behaviours that prevent the spread of the deadly virus.

A deadly outbreak 

The Ebola outbreak is on track to become the deadliest epidemic in the history of the DRC.

The latest information states that the current outbreak has already killed 2,000 lives across the country. 

Caused by the Bundibugyo species, for which there is not yet an approved vaccine, the outbreak is spreading quickly. 

Conflict, poor roads and the lack of access to healthcare are making it difficult to contain. It has recently reached a sixth province in the DR Congo, and it is threatening to spread to neighbouring South Sudan, according to media reports. 

Rebel combatants turned community mobilisers 

Eastern DRC has suffered years of instability as rebel groups have continued to fight government forces, driving millions of people from their homes.

The UN peacekeeping mission, MONUSCO, has supported the demobilisation of former rebels.

After receiving training on prevention measures and detection of suspect cases, the rebels-turned community mobilisers were sent to heavily frequented areas across Tchomia including the central market, the town centre, and the animal feed production site. 

They emphasised the importance of regular handwashing, shared information on how to identify symptoms and stressed the need to promptly report suspect cases to health authorities. 

“The idea here is to make these former combatants and community members active participants in the fight against Ebola,” said Florent Nzama, the coordinator of a local NGO network. 

For MONUSCO the project serves a dual purpose: Responding to a public health emergency and contributing to stabilisation efforts by strengthening community cohesion. 

“This action illustrates their involvement in community life after demobilization,” explained a MONUSCO representative.

Poland has officially taken delivery of its first three F-35 Lightning II aircraft, locally designated “Husarz,” marking a significant milestone in the country’s long-term military modernization program and reinforcing NATO’s airpower posture along its eastern flank.

The arrival of the aircraft represents one of the most consequential upgrades to the Polish Air Force in decades, transitioning Warsaw firmly into the fifth-generation fighter era. The delivery also underscores Poland’s accelerating defense integration with the United States and allied NATO forces amid heightened security tensions in Eastern Europe following Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine.

The ceremonial handover brought together senior Polish government officials, military leadership, representatives from the United States, allied NATO members, and defense industry executives, including delegates from Lockheed Martin, the prime contractor for the F-35 program.

According to Lockheed Martin, the event symbolized both the operational arrival of the aircraft and the strengthening of Poland’s role within NATO’s collective defense framework.

“The arrival of the first F-35 combat aircraft in Poland represents an important milestone for the nation’s defense and for regional security across Europe,” said OJ Sanchez, President of Lockheed Martin Aeronautics. “Poland continues to demonstrate strong leadership within NATO through its commitment to modernization and interoperability with allied forces.”

Sanchez added that the company remains committed to supporting Poland as it develops full operational capability with the aircraft, which are widely regarded as the most advanced multirole fighters currently in service globally.

The newly delivered aircraft are expected to significantly enhance Poland’s ability to operate seamlessly alongside allied forces. The F-35’s advanced sensor fusion, stealth profile, and networked warfare capabilities are designed to penetrate contested airspace and coordinate with NATO assets across land, air, sea, space, and cyber domains.

Defense officials emphasized that Poland’s acquisition of the F-35 strengthens deterrence along NATO’s eastern flank, where alliance members remain focused on reinforcing air policing, rapid response readiness, and integrated air and missile defense.

Poland becomes the first country on NATO’s eastern frontier to operate the fifth-generation stealth platform, placing it among a small group of allied nations fielding the aircraft operationally.

The three aircraft—bearing serial numbers 3509, 3510, and 3511—were transported from the Lockheed Martin final assembly facility in Fort Worth, Texas, before crossing the Atlantic via a multi-leg ferry route that included a stopover in the Azores. The long-range transfer was supported by aerial refueling from a KC-46A Pegasus operated by the United States Air Force.

This delivery method reflects standard procedures for ferrying fifth-generation aircraft across intercontinental distances while maintaining operational safety margins and fuel efficiency through tanker support.

The jets are now based in central Poland, where infrastructure upgrades have been underway for several years to accommodate fifth-generation aircraft requirements, including secure data links, hardened shelters, and specialized maintenance facilities.

Polish Minister of National Defense Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz described the arrival as a transformative moment for the country’s armed forces, releasing video footage showing the F-35s flying in formation escorted by Polish F-16 Fighting Falcon jets.

Kosiniak-Kamysz stated that Poland is entering “a new era” in air capability, emphasizing that the aircraft represent not only a technological leap but also the culmination of years of investment in pilot training, logistics, and defense infrastructure modernization.

Officials noted that Poland’s F-35 program reflects long-term planning aimed at ensuring interoperability with NATO allies while deterring potential regional threats.

The delivery follows an extended training and integration process for Polish pilots and ground crews. The first Polish F-35 aircraft was previously introduced into the training pipeline in the United States and deployed to Ebbing Air National Guard Base, where Polish pilots underwent advanced instruction alongside American instructors.

This training phase is considered critical for developing proficiency in fifth-generation operations, including sensor fusion tactics, electronic warfare coordination, and stealth mission planning.

The gradual buildup ensures that Poland will achieve full operational capability in a structured and phased manner over the coming years, rather than immediate frontline deployment.

The arrival of the F-35 marks a decisive shift away from Poland’s long-standing reliance on Soviet-era aircraft. The Polish Air Force recently retired its Sukhoi Su-22 fleet, which had been in service for approximately four decades. The retirement ceremony took place at Mirosławiec Air Base in September 2025, signaling the end of an era for Warsaw’s Cold War-era attack aviation capabilities.

In parallel, Poland has been transitioning toward Western and NATO-standard platforms, including the South Korean-supplied KAI FA-50 Fighting Eagle, which is intended to fill the capability gap left by retiring Soviet-designed platforms.

Earlier generations of Soviet-designed aircraft—including the MiG-21, MiG-23, and Su-7—were gradually phased out between the 1990s and early 2000s, reflecting Poland’s post-Cold War realignment toward Western defense systems following its accession to NATO.

Poland still operates a small number of MiG-29 Fulcrum aircraft, primarily acquired secondhand from former Warsaw Pact operators such as Germany and the Czech Republic.

However, these aircraft are nearing the end of their operational life, with maintenance becoming increasingly difficult due to aging airframes and limited availability of spare parts—exacerbated by international sanctions on Russia following its 2014 annexation of Crimea.

Poland has also actively supported Ukraine by transferring surplus MiG-29s to bolster Kyiv’s air capabilities in its defense against Russia’s full-scale invasion launched in 2022. While Warsaw has retained some of its F-16 fleet for national defense needs, it has progressively reduced its reliance on legacy Soviet systems.

Deputy Defense Minister Paweł Zalewski confirmed earlier in 2026 that additional MiG-29 aircraft were cleared for transfer to Ukraine, underscoring Warsaw’s continued military support for Kyiv.

Poland’s path to acquiring the F-35 began in earnest in the late 2010s as part of a broader effort to replace its aging MiG-29 and Su-22 fleets. By 2018, Polish defense planners had accelerated efforts to identify a fifth-generation solution capable of ensuring long-term air superiority and interoperability with NATO forces.

In 2019, the United States formally approved Poland’s request to purchase the F-35, and in 2020 Warsaw finalized a contract valued at approximately $4.6 billion for 32 aircraft. The deal represented one of the most significant defense acquisitions in Poland’s modern history.

The decision was driven by both strategic and operational considerations, including the need to counter advanced air defense systems and to ensure survivability in contested environments characterized by anti-access and area-denial (A2/AD) threats.

The importance of the F-35 acquisition was further underscored by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The conflict reshaped NATO defense priorities, prompting member states along the alliance’s eastern flank to accelerate modernization efforts and expand readiness initiatives.

For Poland, the war reinforced the urgency of transitioning away from legacy Soviet platforms toward advanced NATO-compatible systems capable of operating in integrated multi-domain environments.

Defense analysts note that Poland’s F-35 fleet will play a central role in air policing, deterrence, and potential high-end conflict scenarios, particularly in coordination with allied air forces and integrated NATO command structures.

With the arrival of its first F-35A aircraft, Poland has entered a new phase in the evolution of its air force, transitioning from a mixed legacy fleet to a modern, network-centric force structure.

Over the coming years, additional deliveries will expand the fleet to its full contracted strength, while training, infrastructure development, and doctrinal adaptation continue to advance in parallel.

The introduction of the “Husarz” fighters is expected to significantly enhance Poland’s strategic autonomy within NATO’s collective defense framework, while also reinforcing deterrence across one of Europe’s most sensitive security regions.

Canada is reportedly considering a dramatic expansion of its future fighter fleet, potentially combining American F-35 Lightning II stealth fighters with Swedish Gripen E/F aircraft in a move that could reshape the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) while reflecting growing international uncertainty surrounding the United States’ flagship combat aircraft program.

The development comes as the Lockheed Martin F-35 faces increasing headwinds across multiple markets since Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025. A number of current and prospective customers have either reduced planned purchases, delayed procurement decisions, or abandoned acquisition plans altogether amid concerns about Washington’s reliability as a defense partner and broader geopolitical tensions.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government placed Canada’s planned acquisition of 88 F-35A fighters under review in March 2025 following a deterioration in relations with the Trump administration. While Ottawa remains committed to accepting the first 16 aircraft that have already been paid for, the future of the remaining 72 jets has remained uncertain.

The review was initially expected to conclude by the end of summer 2025. However, no final decision has been announced, fueling speculation that Ottawa is weighing a more ambitious approach to modernizing its air force.

According to a recent CBC report citing industry and government sources, Canada is now examining the possibility of operating a significantly larger mixed fleet consisting of both F-35A Lightning II fighters and Saab Gripen E/F aircraft.

Under the reported scenario, Ottawa could proceed with the acquisition of between 72 and 88 F-35s while simultaneously purchasing at least 72 Gripen fighters. One source cited by CBC suggested that Canada’s future combat fleet could eventually reach approximately 140 aircraft.

Although the report has not been independently verified, it aligns with several signals from the Carney government suggesting that Ottawa is not yet prepared to walk away from the F-35 program despite political tensions with Washington.

Canada’s review gained additional momentum after Swedish aerospace company Saab presented an enhanced proposal centered on the Gripen E/F fighter.

The revised package reportedly includes 72 Gripen fighters and six GlobalEye airborne early warning and surveillance aircraft. More significantly, Saab has emphasized industrial and sovereignty benefits that could appeal to Canadian policymakers.

The offer includes local manufacturing opportunities, extensive technology transfer arrangements, access to mission-system source codes, sovereign control over operational data, and the ability for Canada to independently maintain and upgrade the aircraft throughout their service life.

These provisions stand in contrast to concerns frequently raised by critics of the F-35 program, who argue that the highly networked American fighter leaves operators dependent on U.S. support for software updates, logistics, and sustainment.

For Ottawa, the appeal of such autonomy has increased amid a period of strained bilateral relations with Washington.

Despite the ongoing review, several developments suggest that Canada remains deeply invested in the F-35 program.

Lieutenant-General Jamie Speiser-Blanchet, commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, attended ceremonies marking the start of final assembly for Canada’s first F-35A. In addition, Ottawa has already paid for critical components associated with 14 additional aircraft beyond the initial batch.

Defense Minister David McGuinty and other government officials have carefully avoided ruling out additional F-35 purchases while simultaneously keeping alternative options under consideration.

Within Canada’s defense establishment, support for completing the original acquisition remains strong. Senior military officials and opposition Conservative politicians have repeatedly argued that the F-35 is the only available fifth-generation fighter capable of providing the stealth, sensor fusion, and advanced networking capabilities required to counter emerging threats from Russia and China.

Supporters also emphasize the aircraft’s importance for interoperability with the United States under the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the binational framework responsible for defending North American airspace.

Washington has previously suggested that abandoning the F-35 purchase could complicate future NORAD cooperation, adding another layer of strategic pressure to Canada’s deliberations.

Some analysts believe the review itself may have been intended more as a diplomatic signal than a genuine effort to cancel the program.

According to that interpretation, Carney’s government sought to express dissatisfaction with U.S. policies while preserving flexibility to ultimately continue with the acquisition. Observers have also noted that the fate of the F-35 program could become a bargaining chip in broader negotiations surrounding the renewal of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA).

Canada’s uncertainty reflects a broader trend affecting the F-35 program since Trump’s return to office.

Although the aircraft remains the world’s most successful fifth-generation fighter, several countries have reconsidered their procurement plans amid concerns over U.S. foreign policy, tariff disputes, and alliance commitments.

Portugal became one of the first nations to publicly step back from the aircraft in March 2025 when it abandoned plans to purchase up to 36 F-35s as replacements for its aging F-16 fleet.

At the time, outgoing Defense Minister Nuno Melo cited concerns about dependence on an increasingly unpredictable ally.

“The world has changed,” Melo said, warning that political decisions in Washington could affect maintenance, components, and long-term operational availability.

Spain followed with its own decision to shelve plans for acquiring the stealth fighter.

Madrid had previously allocated approximately €6.25 billion ($7.24 billion) for new fighter aircraft, but shifting priorities toward strengthening Europe’s indigenous defense capabilities ultimately pushed the F-35 out of contention.

The decision reflected a wider movement across Europe toward greater strategic autonomy, driven in part by growing concerns over the reliability of transatlantic security arrangements.

Switzerland also scaled back its commitment to the aircraft.

In December 2025, the Swiss government instructed its Defense Ministry to purchase only as many F-35A fighters as could be acquired within the original budget framework of approximately $7.54 billion.

The move effectively reduced the scope of a deal that had originally envisioned the purchase of 36 aircraft.

Swiss officials cited rising costs and budget constraints. Government statements indicated that maintaining the original fleet size would require additional funding that was not politically acceptable.

The controversy was intensified by disagreements regarding pricing assumptions. Swiss authorities reportedly believed the negotiated figure represented a fixed procurement price, while U.S. officials later clarified that inflation-related adjustments could increase costs over time.

The political environment became even more complicated after the Trump administration imposed a 39 percent tariff on Swiss goods, providing additional ammunition to domestic critics who questioned the wisdom of purchasing major American defense equipment.

India represents another market where enthusiasm for the F-35 appears to have cooled.

President Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance publicly floated the possibility of an F-35 sale to New Delhi in early 2025, and the aircraft’s appearance at the Aero India exhibition generated substantial international attention.

The event was particularly notable because it marked one of the first occasions when the F-35 and Russia’s Su-57 fighter appeared at the same air show.

Despite the publicity, no meaningful progress toward a procurement decision has emerged.

Relations between Washington and New Delhi deteriorated later in the year after the United States imposed a 50 percent tariff on Indian goods, one of the highest rates applied to any major trading partner. Additional friction resulted from Trump’s repeated assertions regarding the resolution of the 2025 India-Pakistan conflict, claims that Indian officials strongly disputed.

Against that backdrop, prospects for an F-35 deal have appeared increasingly uncertain.

Lockheed Martin’s difficulties have not been limited to international sales campaigns.

The company suffered a major setback in March 2025 when Boeing secured the contract for the U.S. Air Force’s next-generation F-47 fighter, defeating Lockheed in one of the most important defense competitions of the decade.

The loss was particularly significant given Lockheed Martin’s dominant position in fifth-generation fighter development through the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II programs.

The company had also previously withdrawn from the U.S. Navy’s F/A-XX next-generation fighter competition, leaving it without a leading role in either of America’s major sixth-generation combat aircraft initiatives.

In response, Lockheed Martin has sought to reposition the F-35 as a platform capable of incorporating advanced technologies originally developed for next-generation programs.

Chief Executive Jim Taiclet has argued that many innovations associated with the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) effort can be integrated into the existing F-35 design at substantially lower cost.

Speaking in April 2025, Taiclet suggested that as much as 80 percent of sixth-generation technologies could eventually be incorporated into the aircraft.

“We’re basically going to take the chassis and turn it into a Ferrari,” Taiclet said, describing a future “fifth-generation plus” version of the fighter.

According to Lockheed’s vision, thousands of F-35s expected to enter service worldwide could receive successive capability upgrades that narrow the gap between current-generation aircraft and future sixth-generation platforms.

Whether that strategy succeeds may depend heavily on the decisions now being made in capitals such as Ottawa.

For Canada, the fighter review has evolved into far more than a procurement decision. It has become a test of how middle powers balance operational requirements, industrial interests, alliance obligations, and national sovereignty in an increasingly uncertain geopolitical environment.

Conceived at the height of the Cold War, the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 was born out of urgency, ideology, and industrial ambition. Designed to be fast, simple, and affordable, the aircraft embodied the Soviet Union’s philosophy of mass production and widespread deployment. Few combat aircraft in history have been produced in numbers even remotely comparable, and fewer still have achieved such a broad global footprint. From its first flight in the mid-1950s to its gradual retirement in the 21st century, the MiG-21 shaped air combat, pilot training, and military aviation doctrine for more than half a century.

The MiG-21’s story is not merely one of engineering, but of geopolitics. It reflects the strategic calculations of the Soviet Union, the demands of Cold War alliances, and the realities faced by developing air forces seeking supersonic capability at manageable cost. Understanding how many MiG-21s were built, where they were produced, and how they were used provides insight into why it became the most widely produced supersonic fighter in history and why its legacy remains so enduring.

The origins of the MiG-21 lie in the early 1950s, a period marked by rapid advances in jet propulsion and a growing emphasis on air defense. The Soviet Union, facing the prospect of high-speed Western bombers capable of delivering nuclear weapons, required an interceptor that could climb rapidly, fly at extreme speeds, and be produced in large numbers. The design bureau led by Artem Mikoyan and Mikhail Gurevich responded with a series of experimental fighters that culminated in the Ye-6 prototype, which would evolve into the MiG-21.

From the outset, simplicity was a guiding principle. Soviet planners prioritized speed and altitude performance over comfort, range, or complex avionics. The result was a compact aircraft with a delta wing and a nose-mounted air intake feeding a single turbojet engine. This configuration allowed the MiG-21 to exceed Mach 2, placing it among the fastest fighters of its generation.

The aircraft entered service in 1959, just as the Cold War was entering one of its most intense phases. It quickly became a cornerstone of Soviet air defense and an export success on a scale rarely seen before or since.

The MiG-21 was designed as a lightweight interceptor, optimized for short, high-speed missions under ground-controlled interception. Early variants featured basic radar or none at all, relying heavily on instructions from ground stations to guide pilots toward their targets. This approach suited the Soviet air defense network, which emphasized centralized control and rapid response.

In terms of raw performance, the MiG-21 was formidable. Capable of speeds exceeding Mach 2 at altitude, it could reach altitudes of more than 57,000 feet and climb at exceptional rates. These characteristics made it well-suited for intercepting high-flying bombers and reconnaissance aircraft.

However, the design involved trade-offs. The delta wing, while excellent for high-speed flight, resulted in higher landing speeds and less forgiving handling at low speeds. The aircraft also had relatively short range, limiting its endurance and flexibility. Cockpit ergonomics were basic, and pilot workload could be high, particularly in early versions.

Despite these limitations, the MiG-21’s straightforward design made it robust and relatively easy to maintain. It could operate from austere airfields and withstand harsh environmental conditions, qualities that appealed to air forces with limited infrastructure.

One of the keys to the MiG-21’s longevity was its adaptability. Over the course of its production life, the aircraft evolved through dozens of variants, each reflecting changing requirements and technological progress. Early models focused on pure interception, while later versions incorporated improved radar, guided missiles, and enhanced navigation systems.

As avionics technology advanced, later MiG-21 variants gained better all-weather capability and increased lethality. The introduction of air-to-air missiles such as the K-13 (NATO reporting name AA-2 Atoll) allowed the aircraft to engage targets beyond visual range, at least in theory. Subsequent upgrades improved reliability and expanded the range of compatible weapons.

These incremental improvements ensured that the MiG-21 remained relevant even as newer fighters entered service. While it never matched the sophistication of later Western designs, its continued evolution allowed it to serve effectively in a wide range of roles, from air defense to ground attack.

The MiG-21 cannot be understood in isolation from the design bureau that created it. Mikoyan-Gurevich, commonly known as MiG, was founded in 1939 and quickly rose to prominence during World War II. The bureau’s focus on high-performance fighters aligned closely with Soviet strategic priorities.

Following the war, MiG gained international recognition with the MiG-15, which proved highly effective during the Korean War. This success established the bureau’s reputation and set the stage for a series of influential designs. The MiG-17 and MiG-19 followed, each building on the lessons of its predecessors.

The MiG-21 represented the culmination of this evolutionary process. It combined the speed and climb performance emphasized by Soviet doctrine with a level of simplicity that made it suitable for mass production and export. This combination proved decisive in securing its place as the most widely produced supersonic fighter in history.

The scale of MiG-21 production remains remarkable even by modern standards. Built over several decades, from the late 1950s into the 1980s, more than 11,000 examples were constructed worldwide. This figure has earned the MiG-21 recognition as the most-produced jet-powered military aircraft in history.

The majority of these aircraft were produced within the Soviet Union. Three major factories—located in Moscow, Gorky, and Tbilisi—turned out thousands of MiG-21s for both domestic use and export. These facilities operated at a tempo that reflected the Soviet emphasis on quantity as a strategic advantage.

Licensed production further expanded the aircraft’s numbers. In Czechoslovakia, nearly 200 MiG-21F-13 fighters were built under license, while India assembled more than 650 MiG-21 variants through Hindustan Aeronautics Limited. These licensed programs not only increased production totals but also transferred valuable aerospace manufacturing expertise to partner nations.

When Soviet and licensed production are combined, commonly cited totals reach approximately 11,496 aircraft. This immense output ensured that the MiG-21 would become a familiar sight across four continents.

The MiG-21’s widespread distribution was no accident. It formed a central element of Soviet military aid and export policy, strengthening alliances and extending influence. By providing allied states with a capable supersonic fighter, the Soviet Union bolstered the air defense capabilities of friendly regimes while standardizing equipment across the Warsaw Pact and beyond.

As a result, MiG-21s served with between 50 and 60 air forces worldwide. They became fixtures in Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, often forming the backbone of national air forces. For many countries, the MiG-21 represented their first experience with supersonic flight.

This global proliferation also meant that the MiG-21 saw combat in a wide variety of conflicts. From Southeast Asia to the Middle East and Africa, the aircraft was tested in real-world conditions against a range of opponents.

Operationally, the MiG-21 developed a mixed but notable reputation. In conflicts such as the Vietnam War, it demonstrated that, in skilled hands, it could challenge more technologically advanced adversaries. Its small size, high speed, and agility at certain flight regimes made it a difficult target and a capable dogfighter under the right conditions.

However, the aircraft’s limitations were also apparent. Restricted situational awareness, limited fuel capacity, and basic avionics placed significant demands on pilots. Success often depended less on technology than on training, tactics, and coordination with ground control.

Over time, the MiG-21 became a symbol of both the strengths and weaknesses of Soviet fighter design. It was not a sophisticated platform, but it was effective enough, affordable enough, and available in sufficient numbers to shape the balance of air power in many regions.

One of the most striking aspects of the MiG-21’s history is its longevity. Many air forces continued to operate the aircraft long after newer designs became available, often upgrading existing airframes rather than replacing them outright. For some nations, economic constraints made the MiG-21 the only viable option for maintaining a supersonic capability.

As of the mid-2020s, however, the aircraft’s era of frontline service has largely ended. European operators gradually retired their fleets, with Croatia withdrawing its remaining MiG-21s by 2024 as it transitioned to modern Western fighters. This marked the end of routine MiG-21 operations in Europe.

In South Asia, the Indian Air Force, one of the MiG-21’s largest and longest-serving users, completed its withdrawal in 2025 after more than six decades of continuous service. The retirement was marked by ceremonial farewell flights, underscoring the aircraft’s deep connection to Indian military aviation history.

Elsewhere, most former operators had already phased out the MiG-21 due to rising maintenance demands, safety concerns, and the availability of more capable alternatives. By early 2026, only a handful of airframes remained in limited service or storage, with no confirmed examples still operating in active combat roles.

Among the many variants produced, the MiG-21 PFM stands as a representative example of the type’s capabilities. Designed as a lightweight supersonic interceptor, it could reach speeds of approximately Mach 2.05 at altitude and about Mach 1.05 at sea level. Its service ceiling of around 57,400 feet and exceptional climb rate highlighted its emphasis on rapid interception.

Powered by a single Tumansky R-25-300 turbojet engine, producing more than 15,000 pounds of thrust with afterburner, the MiG-21 PFM combined speed and climb performance with a compact airframe. Armament typically included a 23 mm cannon and air-to-air missiles, reflecting the aircraft’s role as a point-defense fighter.

While later variants introduced improved avionics and weapons, the fundamental performance characteristics established by early models like the PFM defined the MiG-21’s identity.

Today, the MiG-21 survives primarily as a historical artifact rather than a combat asset. Numerous examples are preserved in aviation museums around the world, where they serve as tangible reminders of Cold War-era air power. A limited number remain airworthy in private collections or heritage flight programs, showcasing the aircraft’s distinctive silhouette and performance to new generations.

Some airframes continue to be used in secondary roles, such as training or testing, but there is no verified evidence of the MiG-21 remaining in active operational combat service anywhere in the world. Its continued presence is now largely symbolic.

The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 occupies a unique place in aviation history. It was not the most advanced fighter of its time, nor the most versatile, but it was arguably the most influential. Its simplicity, speed, and adaptability allowed it to be produced in extraordinary numbers and operated by a diverse range of air forces.

For many pilots, the MiG-21 was their introduction to supersonic flight. For many nations, it represented a leap into modern air power. And for the Soviet Union, it was a strategic tool that extended influence and deterrence across the globe.

Although its days in frontline service are now over, the MiG-21’s legacy endures. Preserved in museums and remembered in the histories of countless air forces, it stands as a symbol of an era when speed, numbers, and reliability defined military aviation. Few aircraft have left such a lasting imprint on the world’s skies.

Despite possessing the largest armada of military aircraft in the world, the United States has never relied on numbers alone to guarantee air superiority. Instead, American defense strategy has consistently emphasized qualitative dominance—ensuring that its aircraft, pilots, sensors, and networks outperform any potential adversary. In the modern era, that philosophy has manifested most clearly in the overwhelming focus on stealth fighter jets, advanced avionics, and network-centric warfare.

Today, the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps collectively operate the most advanced and diverse combat aviation fleet ever assembled. Not only are American warplanes tactically superior to those of any rival, but they also exist in far greater numbers that are combat-ready at any given moment. While China and Russia have made significant strides in developing their own stealth fighters, neither has yet matched the scale, maturity, or operational integration achieved by the United States.

According to data compiled by World Population Review, the United States fields more military aircraft than any other nation on Earth. Its defense budget alone exceeds that of the next four of the world’s top five military spenders combined. This enormous financial commitment translates directly into research, development, training, maintenance, and—critically—availability. Aircraft are only as useful as their readiness rates, and this is an area where the U.S. maintains a decisive advantage.

An April 2025 study reported to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) underscored the imbalance in global defense spending. The top five military spenders—the United States, China, Russia, Germany, and India—account for roughly 60% of all defense expenditure worldwide. While China and Russia command significant resources, the United States remains in a league of its own, able to fund multiple parallel development programs while sustaining large operational fleets across the globe.

Russia is often described as America’s closest near-peer adversary in air power, but the gap between the two has widened considerably. Sanctions, industrial bottlenecks, and limited access to advanced components have slowed Russian aerospace programs, while U.S. production lines continue to deliver aircraft at scale. The result is a stark imbalance in both quantity and quality.

At the highest end of the spectrum, the world’s most capable fighter jets are concentrated in the hands of just a few air forces. The modern contest for air superiority has effectively become a race to assemble the largest and most capable fleet of fifth-generation stealth fighters, even as development of sixth-generation systems accelerates.

Japan stands out as a notable outlier among U.S. allies. It is the second-largest operator of the F-35 Lightning II outside the United States, reflecting Tokyo’s strategic assessment that air superiority will be decisive in any future conflict in the Indo-Pacific. South Korea, Australia, and several European states are following similar paths, building fleets centered on American stealth aircraft while modernizing their supporting forces.

Europe, meanwhile, made a conscious decision in the 1990s and early 2000s not to pursue a domestic fifth-generation stealth fighter. Instead, countries such as the United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands, and Norway opted to procure the F-35 to handle stealth-critical missions. Indigenous programs like the Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale continued in parallel, optimized for air policing, interception, and non-stealth strike missions. This “high–low mix” has allowed European air forces to maintain capability while deferring the enormous costs of developing a stealth aircraft from scratch.

To fully appreciate modern air power, it is essential to understand how fighter aircraft are categorized by generation—a framework used across the global defense industry. Each generation reflects major technological leaps rather than strict timelines.

First-generation fighters, emerging in the immediate aftermath of World War II, were simple turbojet aircraft without radar, reliant entirely on visual dogfighting and machine guns. Icons like the American F-86 Sabre and the Soviet MiG-15 defined this era.

Second-generation fighters introduced radar, early air-to-air missiles, and sustained supersonic flight. The MiG-21 became the most widely produced jet fighter in history, symbolizing this shift.

Third-generation aircraft such as the F-4 Phantom II brought true multirole capability, improved maneuverability, and more sophisticated missile systems, allowing fighters to dominate both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions.

Fourth-generation fighters, including the F-15 Eagle and Su-27 Flanker, represented a dramatic leap in agility and situational awareness. Fly-by-wire controls, pulse-Doppler radar, and head-up displays transformed air combat.

The so-called 4.5-generation comprises upgraded fourth-generation airframes fitted with active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars, advanced data links, and reduced radar signatures. Aircraft like the Eurofighter Typhoon and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet remain among the most capable non-stealth fighters in service today.

Fifth-generation fighters marked a revolution. Platforms such as the F-22 Raptor introduced all-aspect stealth, internal weapons bays, supercruise, and deep sensor fusion, allowing pilots to see and strike adversaries long before being detected.

Sixth-generation systems, now in development, promise even greater change. Artificial intelligence assistance, loyal wingman drones, directed-energy weapons, and advanced digital cloaking are expected to redefine how air combat is conducted.

The United States remains the only nation operating a mature, dual-fleet fifth-generation force. The F-22 Raptor serves as the world’s premier air dominance fighter, while the F-35 Lightning II functions as a multirole strike aircraft optimized for networked warfare.

The F-35 program, managed by Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works, is the largest defense project in American history. It eclipses historic efforts such as the Manhattan Project, the B-29 Superfortress, and even the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber in terms of total investment. Crucially, the F-35 is the first stealth fighter produced in truly large numbers.

Currently, roughly one-third of the U.S. tactical fighter fleet consists of fifth-generation aircraft—and that proportion is still rising. Less than half of all planned F-35s have been delivered, meaning the fleet will continue to grow well into the 2030s.

American fifth-generation jets do far more than simply fly and fight. They function as nodes in a vast data network, sharing targeting and sensor information with other aircraft, ships, satellites, and ground forces. In combat, F-22s and F-35s penetrate contested airspace, detect and designate targets, and pass that information to fourth- and 4.5-generation aircraft acting as “missile trucks.” Modernized F-15EX and F-16 fighters, carrying large weapons loads, then engage targets identified by stealth platforms operating ahead of them.

While fifth-generation fighters emphasize stealth and sensor fusion, sixth-generation systems aim to dominate the entire battlespace. The U.S. Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program represents a fundamental shift away from the idea of a single aircraft. Instead, NGAD is conceived as a family of systems—manned fighters, autonomous drones, sensors, and weapons—designed to operate seamlessly together.

In 2025, Boeing was awarded the contract for the manned NGAD fighter, now designated the F-47. Intended primarily for operations across the vast distances of the Pacific, the aircraft is expected to feature extreme range, enormous electrical power generation, and deep integration with autonomous “loyal wingman” drones. These drones will extend the fighter’s sensors, carry weapons, and absorb risk in the most dangerous parts of the battlespace.

Europe’s absence from the fifth-generation race has sharpened its focus on sixth-generation development. Two major projects are underway. The Future Combat Air System (FCAS), led by France with Germany and Spain, is designed as a “combat cloud,” integrating fighters, drones, satellites, and command systems. However, political and industrial disagreements—particularly over cost sharing and intellectual property—have slowed progress.

The Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), involving the United Kingdom, Italy, and Japan, aims to produce a large, long-range fighter optimized for massive electrical output to support advanced sensors, electronic warfare, and potentially laser weapons. GCAP’s designers emphasize digital architecture and AI integration, seeking to surpass even the F-35 in networking sophistication.

European aircraft already excel in certain areas. The French Rafale’s SPECTRA electronic warfare suite, for example, does not make the aircraft invisible to radar, but it jams and deceives enemy sensors so effectively that survivability can approach that of stealth designs. Europe’s approach emphasizes active electronic warfare, while the U.S. traditionally prioritizes passive stealth shaping.

European fighters also benefit from integration with Western-standard weapons, notably the Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile, widely regarded as the most capable of its class in the world.

China represents the most serious long-term challenge to American air dominance. Beijing’s strategy has evolved from territorial defense to power projection deep into the Pacific. The People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) is now the only force besides the United States to mass-produce a stealth fighter: the Chengdu J-20 Mighty Dragon.

Estimates suggest China has produced more than 300 J-20s, likely surpassing Russia’s total stealth fleet. The J-20 continues to evolve, with improved engines, sensors, and networking capabilities. China also operates the world’s largest fleet of Flanker derivatives, including the J-11 and J-16, which serve as powerful 4.5-generation “missile trucks” supporting stealth operations.

China’s Chengdu J-10 fills a role similar to the American F-16: a highly agile, single-engine multirole fighter. Meanwhile, the JF-17 Block III—developed with Pakistan—offers advanced avionics and helmet-mounted displays at a relatively low cost, making it a potent option for nations unable to afford top-tier aircraft.

Looking ahead, China is flight-testing at least two sixth-generation demonstrators. The tailless, triple-engine J-36 emphasizes speed, altitude, and stealth, while the Shenyang J-50 appears optimized for broadband stealth and deep drone integration. Both point toward a Chinese ambition to field operational sixth-generation systems by the mid-2030s.

Russia remains a formidable air power, particularly in specialized roles such as high-speed interception and extreme maneuverability. However, by 2026, the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) increasingly trail both the United States and China in the production of modern fifth-generation aircraft.

The Su-57 Felon, Russia’s flagship stealth fighter, has been produced in very limited numbers—believed to be in the low tens. Sanctions have restricted access to critical components, forcing the Russian industry to adapt under difficult conditions. Recent integration of the AL-51 engine is intended to unlock full fifth-generation performance, including improved supercruise and reduced infrared signature.

Russia’s future ambitions center on the MiG-41, a proposed sixth-generation interceptor designed to replace the MiG-31 Foxhound. Claimed performance includes speeds exceeding Mach 4, near-space operating altitudes, and anti-satellite capabilities. Whether such claims can be realized remains uncertain.

In practice, the VKS relies on a high–low mix dominated by heavily modernized Soviet-era designs. Aircraft such as the Su-35S, Su-30SM2, and Su-34M feature advanced avionics, AESA or advanced PESA radars, and exceptional maneuverability, but they lack the full stealth and networking advantages of Western fifth-generation fleets.

Despite extraordinary technological advances, many air power theorists argue that the most critical system in any fighter jet remains the pilot. Training, experience, and decision-making still determine outcomes in the air. However, modern technology dramatically enhances what pilots can achieve.

The 21st century battlespace is defined by information dominance. Stealth, sensor fusion, AI-assisted decision-making, and autonomous drones have transformed the sky into a complex, contested domain. Pilots today manage vast streams of data while coordinating with unmanned systems and joint forces across multiple domains.

Ultimately, air power supremacy is no longer just about speed or maneuverability. It is about integration—of platforms, networks, and people. In that integrated ecosystem, the United States continues to hold a decisive edge, even as rivals race to close the gap.

Following the downfall of the so-called Islamic State in Syria, Kurdish-run prisons hold about 8,000 suspected IS fighters and around 34,000 of their family members in camps.

But there is growing instability in the region as the central government in Damascus wants to extend its control across all of Syria, including the Kurdish autonomous region in the north-east.

In the past two weeks, government troops have pushed the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) out of resource-rich areas they have controlled for a decade – since defeating IS.

Will the gates remain locked if this region becomes a battleground? The BBC’s Orla Guerin visited Roj, a camp holding the wives and children of suspected IS fighters near the Turkish and Iraqi borders.

Read more on this story.

China’s confirmation that its export-configured J-10CE fighter jet has achieved its first combat victory marks a pivotal moment in modern aerial warfare, signalling both the maturation of Chinese aerospace engineering and a structural shift in the global fighter aircraft market amid intensifying great-power competition.

The announcement by the State Administration of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense (SASTIND), which included the J-10CE’s battlefield performance among China’s Top 10 National Defence Science and Technology Achievements for 2025, represents the first official acknowledgement that a Chinese-exported combat aircraft has decisively engaged and defeated advanced Western-origin fighters in live combat.

“In mid-May, the country’s export-oriented J-10CE fighter jet achieved its first combat victory, shooting down multiple aircraft in air combat without suffering any losses itself,” SASTIND said in a statement. The wording is notable not only for its clarity, but also for the fact that it constitutes a state-endorsed validation of Chinese air-combat lethality, rather than an unverified foreign military claim or media report.

Amplified by state outlets including Xinhua and ECNS, the disclosure emerged from the brief yet highly consequential Indo-Pakistani aerial confrontation known as Operation Sindoor, an episode that compressed decades of theoretical debate over beyond-visual-range (BVR) combat into a matter of days.

According to Pakistani accounts, Pakistan Air Force (PAF) J-10CE fighters neutralised multiple Indian Air Force (IAF) aircraft without losses of their own. If accurate, the engagement represents the first instance in which Chinese avionics, sensors, missiles, and networked combat doctrine were tested against Western platforms in a peer-level air battle.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar underscored the broader implications when he said that PAF fighters had brought down Rafales and that “they [the Chinese] were pleased,” a remark widely interpreted as evidence of how closely Beijing monitored the operational performance of its export flagship under real combat stress.

The implications extend far beyond the subcontinent. For dozens of air forces reassessing procurement strategies, the J-10CE’s combat debut reshapes calculations about cost-effective alternatives to Western fighters that increasingly exceed USD 100 million per unit.

More critically, China now possesses one of the most powerful marketing assets in the global arms trade: battlefield validation. Historically, real combat performance has been the single most influential factor driving fighter aircraft export success, often outweighing technical specifications on paper.

As geopolitical fragmentation deepens and arms embargoes proliferate, the J-10CE’s performance positions China as a credible, combat-proven supplier capable of challenging entrenched Western and Russian dominance across multiple regions.

The Chengdu J-10CE is the culmination of nearly four decades of Chinese aerospace ambition. Originally conceived during the Cold War as a lightweight interceptor, the J-10 has evolved into a multirole combat aircraft capable of contesting advanced fourth-plus-generation Western fighters.

Developed by Chengdu Aircraft Corporation under the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), the programme reflects Beijing’s long-term strategy to eliminate reliance on foreign combat aircraft while building an export-oriented defence industrial base.

The export-configured J-10CE incorporates structural refinements, upgraded avionics architecture, and enhanced weapons integration compared with earlier domestic variants. These upgrades enable it to function as a fully networked node within modern sensor-fusion and integrated air-defence environments.

Powered by the WS-10B Taihang turbofan, producing roughly 113 kilonewtons of thrust with afterburner, the aircraft can exceed Mach 2.0 and achieve a combat radius of more than 1,150 kilometres. Its delta-canard design, paired with a digital fly-by-wire system, provides high manoeuvrability while preserving energy during BVR engagements.

Central to its sensor suite is the KLJ-7A active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, reportedly capable of tracking multiple targets beyond 150 kilometres and guiding several missiles simultaneously via secure datalinks.

With 11 hardpoints and a payload capacity of up to seven tonnes, the J-10CE can carry advanced air-to-air missiles, precision-guided munitions, and stand-off weapons. Its integration with the PL-15 BVR missile—believed to have a range exceeding 200 kilometres—fundamentally alters engagement geometry by compressing adversary reaction time.

Crucially, all of this comes at an estimated unit cost of USD 40–50 million, dramatically undercutting Western rivals while offering comparable lethality on paper.

Pakistan’s decision to procure the J-10CE in 2020 followed a reassessment triggered by the 2019 Balakot crisis, when Islamabad identified gaps in its long-range air-combat deterrence relative to India’s acquisition of the Rafale.

By May 2025, the Pentagon’s China Military Power Report confirmed the delivery of 20 J-10CE aircraft to Pakistan, with a total order of 36 expected by early 2026. The fighter now forms a cornerstone of Pakistan’s evolving air doctrine, supplementing the JF-17 Thunder and enabling the retirement of ageing Mirage III and V fleets.

PAF Air Chief Marshal Zaheer Ahmed Baber Sidhu described the aircraft as a “strategic equaliser,” highlighting its role in restoring deterrence along the Line of Control.

Operational integration focused heavily on BVR proficiency, sensor fusion, and cooperative engagement with ground-based early warning and air-defence systems, including Chinese-supplied surface-to-air missiles. By 2022, operational squadrons had reportedly achieved full mission readiness.

Operation Sindoor in mid-May 2025 marked a rare real-world confrontation between Chinese-exported airpower and Western-origin fighters. Triggered by cross-border incidents and escalating retaliatory strikes, Indian aircraft—including Rafales—conducted deep penetration missions.

Pakistan scrambled J-10CEs to intercept, marking the first documented use of Chinese AESA-equipped fighters and long-range missiles against Western platforms in combat.

Pakistani officials claim a lopsided kill ratio, asserting that multiple Indian aircraft were downed without PAF losses. Indian responses were cautious, with anonymous sources acknowledging aircraft losses while attributing them to intelligence failures and underestimation of Pakistan’s BVR capabilities.

Fragments identified as PL-15 missiles recovered near crash sites have been cited as circumstantial evidence supporting Pakistani claims, though full independent verification remains limited.

Regardless of contested details, the engagement has altered perceptions. In South Asia, it compresses Indian decision-making timelines and reinforces Pakistan’s deterrence posture. Analysts say it raises questions about survivability in environments dominated by long-range sensors and missiles.

Beyond the region, the episode has implications for Taiwan, the Middle East, and Africa—areas where Chinese doctrine emphasises layered denial and long-range engagement.

For Beijing, the J-10CE’s validation strengthens defence diplomacy and bolsters claims of technological self-reliance. SASTIND explicitly noted that the achievement enhances the “international competitiveness” of Chinese aviation products.

Interest in the aircraft has reportedly intensified from Egypt, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, Iran, and Bangladesh, driven by budget constraints, sanctions risk, and the appeal of combat-proven systems without political conditionality.

China’s confirmation of the J-10CE’s maiden combat triumph marks a watershed in global air-combat history. It signals that Chinese aerospace systems have crossed a critical threshold—from theoretical challengers to combat-validated alternatives—reshaping assumptions about air superiority, deterrence, and the future balance of power in the global fighter market.

Beyond tactics, the episode underscores a broader shift: air dominance in the coming decades will hinge less on platform pedigree and more on the effectiveness of integrated, networked kill chains. For defence planners worldwide, the message is clear—the era of unchallenged Western monopoly in high-end air combat is drawing to a close.

Getty Images

Getty Images

Morocco’s ongoing negotiations with the United States for the acquisition of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II represent a potential turning point in North African military aviation, signaling Rabat’s ambition to join the global cohort of fifth-generation airpower operators. Analysts estimate the potential acquisition package at between US$17 billion and US$18 billion (approximately RM80–85 billion) over the aircraft’s projected life cycle, highlighting the strategic and fiscal commitment Morocco is willing to undertake to leapfrog legacy platforms.

The pursuit of the F-35 carries far-reaching implications for regional security dynamics. Should Morocco succeed, it would become the first African nation and only the second in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region after Israel to operate a fifth-generation stealth fighter. This move is poised to reshape regional perceptions of deterrence credibility, technological parity, and alliance alignment amid a contested security environment spanning the Sahel, the Atlantic approaches, and the Western Mediterranean.

Morocco’s initiative marks a shift from incremental modernization toward transformational capability acquisition. The Royal Moroccan Air Force (RMAF) aims to close enduring gaps in survivability, deep-strike reach, electronic warfare dominance, and sensor-fusion capabilities—deficiencies that cannot be addressed by upgraded fourth-generation platforms alone. Modernized F-16s or Mirage 2000s, even with advanced avionics, cannot replicate the strategic advantages offered by a platform designed from inception for stealth, sensor integration, and network-centric operations.

The strategic rationale for Morocco’s F-35 pursuit has been indirectly reinforced by U.S. policymakers. In a November 2025 engagement with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, then-U.S. President Donald Trump commented, “I know they’d like you to get planes of reduced calibre, but as far as I’m concerned, I think they are both at a level where they should get top of the line.” Defense analysts interpreted this statement as indicative of Washington’s evolving flexibility on fifth-generation exports to trusted partners, signaling a potential policy window for Morocco.

Morocco’s interest in the F-35 should therefore be viewed as a calculated strategic posture rather than a routine procurement. The acquisition reflects a desire to enhance airpower modernisation, strengthen alliance politics, reinforce deterrence in Western Sahara, and anchor Morocco more firmly within U.S.-led security architectures amid intensifying great-power competition across Africa.

The proposed program underscores Morocco’s confidence in its long-term fiscal and operational sustainability. Beyond the initial procurement cost, the F-35 demands decades of sustained investment in software upgrades, classified infrastructure, training cycles, and secure maintenance systems. The willingness to shoulder these responsibilities reflects disciplined defence planning and a commitment to enduring capability rather than short-term capability boosts.

Strategically, the F-35 would transform Morocco’s air defense doctrine from platform-centric operations to effects-based operations. Its stealth, networked sensors, and persistent ISR capabilities would enable Rabat to influence adversary behavior through battlespace awareness, precision strikes, and pre-emptive control rather than reactive responses. The aircraft’s operational flexibility would also allow Morocco to serve as a regional stabilizer in alignment with U.S. strategic objectives, extending influence without necessitating direct American military presence.

The F-35’s potential integration would also catalyze doctrinal and organizational reforms within the RMAF. Command-and-control structures, joint-force integration, data fusion, and decision-making processes would need to adapt to a high-speed, networked operational environment, elevating Morocco’s military effectiveness beyond the raw size of its fleet. In essence, the F-35 would not merely augment Morocco’s airpower but redefine its strategic identity as a technologically sophisticated, alliance-integrated actor in North Africa.

The foundation for Morocco’s F-35 aspirations lies in its longstanding bilateral defense relationship with the United States. Designated a Major Non-NATO Ally in 2004, Rabat has enjoyed preferential access to advanced U.S. military technology, facilitating high-value arms transfers that have progressively reshaped the RMAF’s operational profile. This relationship gained additional momentum following the 2020 Abraham Accords, which normalized Morocco’s relations with Israel in exchange for U.S. recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. This diplomatic realignment removed barriers to high-end technology transfer and enhanced Rabat’s strategic value within Washington’s Middle East and Africa calculus.

Since 2020, trilateral security convergence with Israel and the United States has expanded through intelligence sharing, joint training, and interoperability initiatives. Notably, the November 2021 meeting between Moroccan Defence Minister Abdellatif Loudiyi and Israeli Defence Minister Benny Gantz established formal frameworks for military cooperation that directly support fifth-generation operational concepts. By 2025, the U.S.–Morocco Defense Cooperation Roadmap (2020–2030) further codified this partnership, encompassing counter-terrorism, maritime security, and port security initiatives. Within this framework, the F-35 emerges as a strategic instrument to consolidate Morocco’s transformation into a high-trust security partner interoperable with U.S., Israeli, and European forces.

At the technical level, the F-35’s capabilities would fundamentally alter Morocco’s air combat dynamics. Its low-observable design, AN/APG-81 AESA radar, Distributed Aperture System, and advanced electronic support measures provide situational awareness and targeting dominance in contested environments. Powered by the Pratt & Whitney F135 engine, generating roughly 191 kilonewtons of thrust, the F-35A offers multi-role precision strike, deep penetration, and ISR capabilities across distances exceeding 1,200 kilometers, directly supporting territorial defense and expeditionary missions.

RMAF planners anticipate a fleet of up to 32 F-35A aircraft, complemented by simulators, secure maintenance infrastructure, encrypted data systems, and advanced munitions integration, collectively driving the program’s lifecycle cost toward US$18 billion. Beyond aircraft numbers, the investment represents a qualitative shift in doctrine toward information-dominant warfare, emphasizing network integration and sensor fusion as force multipliers.

Morocco’s post-2020 defense normalization with Israel plays a critical role in shaping regional acceptance of this acquisition. Israel’s assessment framework for F-35 sales prioritizes intent and alignment over platform parity, and Morocco is considered a defensive, status-quo actor focused on territorial deterrence, Western Sahara stability, and Sahel security rather than power projection against Israel. Moreover, Israel retains structural superiority through its uniquely modified F-35I “Adir,” which incorporates sovereign avionics, electronic warfare suites, mission software, and classified subsystems inaccessible to other operators. Geographic separation and alignment with U.S. and Israeli strategic interests further mitigate concerns, allowing Morocco to modernize without challenging Israel’s qualitative edge.

The prospective F-35 acquisition also has implications for Algeria, whose air force modernization relies on Russian platforms such as the Su-30MKA, Su-34, and potential Su-57 purchases. While Algeria emphasizes numerical mass and kinetic payload, Morocco’s stealth-enabled F-35 capability would provide an asymmetrical advantage through first-look engagement, deep ISR, and precision strike, complicating any adversary’s air defense planning. Within the context of Western Sahara, such capabilities would strengthen deterrence by imposing high operational costs for potential aggression.

Morocco’s defense budget trajectory supports this high-end acquisition. The national defense budget rose from approximately 124 billion dirhams (US$12.4 billion) in 2024 to 133 billion dirhams (US$13.3 billion) in 2025, with further increases anticipated for high-end acquisitions. Investments in AH-64E Apache helicopters, M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams tanks, and MQ-9B SeaGuardian drones are being integrated into a multi-domain architecture, with the F-35 serving as a critical airborne command node for synchronized land, maritime, and air operations.

Beyond military capability, the pursuit of the F-35 sends a strong geopolitical signal. By aligning its most sensitive airpower capability with U.S. systems, Morocco strengthens interoperability, intelligence sharing, and political alignment, countering the proliferation of Russian and Chinese defense technologies in Africa. It positions Morocco as a reference point for African modernization, potentially influencing procurement patterns as nations reassess the trade-offs between capability, cost, and alliance integration.

While congressional approval and long-term sustainment costs remain challenges, Morocco’s calculated pursuit of the F-35 demonstrates a commitment to enduring deterrence credibility, strategic leverage, and the transformation of its airpower into a technologically sophisticated, alliance-integrated force capable of shaping North African security outcomes for decades to come.

The United States carried out precision military strikes against Islamic State (ISIS) terrorist camps in northwest Nigeria’s Sokoto State on Christmas Day, an operation ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump and coordinated with Nigerian authorities. While both governments described the strikes as a successful counterterrorism action that killed multiple militants, the operation has triggered intense debate in Nigeria and beyond over its strategic value, intelligence accuracy, religious framing, and whether it signals deeper U.S. military involvement in one of West Africa’s most complex security environments.

President Trump was the first to announce the strikes publicly on December 25, 2025, posting on his Truth Social platform that he had directed a “powerful and deadly strike against ISIS Terrorist Scum in Northwest Nigeria.” He claimed the militants had been “targeting and viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians, at levels not seen for many years, and even Centuries!”

The statement immediately sparked alarm across Nigeria, with many citizens, activists, and commentators expressing concern that the United States may have carried out a unilateral military action violating Nigerian sovereignty. Social media platforms were flooded with questions about whether Nigeria had approved the strikes and fears that the country could become a new theatre for expanded U.S. military operations in Africa.

Within hours, however, officials in both Washington and Abuja moved to clarify the situation. U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) confirmed that the strikes were conducted “in coordination with Nigerian authorities,” while Nigerian officials stressed that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu had explicitly approved the operation following high-level consultations. Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar and Information Minister Mohammed Idris said the action followed intelligence-sharing discussions with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and was jointly planned.

“The precision strikes were executed with the full involvement of the Armed Forces of Nigeria,” Idris said, adding that senior defence and foreign affairs officials supervised the operation. This framing helped ease early tensions, repositioning the strikes as a joint counterterrorism effort rather than an act of foreign intervention.

According to Nigerian officials, two major ISIS-linked terrorist enclaves located within the Bauni forest in Tangaza Local Government Area of Sokoto State were targeted. U.S. Africa Command said there were multiple militant casualties but did not specify the identities of those killed or clarify which armed factions were hit, noting the presence of numerous violent groups operating in the region.

Details of the operation suggest a significant show of U.S. military capability. Nigeria said the United States deployed 16 GPS-guided precision munitions using MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial platforms, launched from “maritime platforms domiciled in the Gulf of Guinea.” Some debris from the munitions reportedly fell in Jabo village in Tambuwal Local Government Area of Sokoto State, as well as in neighbouring Kwara State near a hotel, though authorities said no civilians were injured.

Other U.S. media reports indicated that the strikes were launched from a U.S. Navy warship positioned in the Gulf of Guinea. A Pentagon-released video appeared to show at least one missile being fired from a naval vessel flying the American flag. The primary weapons were widely reported to be Tomahawk cruise missiles — long-range, sea-launched, precision-guided munitions typically fired from U.S. surface ships or submarines. More than a dozen Tomahawks were reportedly used in the attack.

No manned aircraft or U.S. ground forces were involved, making the operation a stand-off naval missile strike rather than a drone-only or close-air support mission, which has been more typical of past U.S. counterterrorism actions in Africa. The strikes followed weeks of increasingly sharp rhetoric from the Trump administration over alleged violence against Christians in Nigeria. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth later hinted that further strikes could follow, saying there was “more to come.”

Despite official assurances, analysts have questioned both the choice of location and the broader strategic logic behind the strikes. Northwestern Nigeria, including Sokoto State, has for years been plagued primarily by heavily armed criminal gangs known locally as “bandits,” who engage in mass kidnappings, cattle rustling, and village raids. While jihadist elements have increasingly appeared in the region, it is not considered the epicentre of Nigeria’s Islamist insurgency.

That distinction belongs to the northeast, particularly Borno State, where Boko Haram and its rival offshoot, Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), have waged a brutal insurgency since 2009, killing tens of thousands and displacing millions.

“If you’re going to strike, then it shouldn’t be the least affected areas,” said Victoria Ekhomu, an analyst and head of the Association of Industrial Security & Safety Operators of Nigeria. “A more obvious target would have been northeastern Borno state, the epicentre of Nigeria’s jihadist conflict.”

Foreign Minister Tuggar acknowledged the complexity of Nigeria’s security landscape, noting the presence of multiple armed actors. He cited the activities of ISWAP, the al-Qaeda-linked Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims (JNIM), as well as groups known locally as Lakurawa and Mahmuda. However, analysts remain divided over how closely some of these groups are linked to global jihadist networks.

Lakurawa, widely regarded as the main jihadist group operating in Sokoto State, has recently been linked by some researchers to Islamic State Sahel Province (ISSP), which is active in neighbouring Niger and Mali. Others, however, argue that the term “Lakurawa” is used loosely to describe a range of armed groups, making definitive attribution difficult. The possible expansion of JNIM into Nigeria has also raised alarm, particularly after the group claimed an attack near the Nigeria–Benin border in October.

Beyond questions of targeting, Trump’s religious framing of the strikes has drawn sharp criticism. In October and November, he accused Nigeria’s government of allowing what he called a “genocide” of Christians — language long used by segments of the U.S. and European religious right to describe Nigeria’s overlapping conflicts.

The Nigerian government and independent analysts strongly reject this characterisation, pointing out that violence across the country has killed Muslims and Christians alike, often driven by a mix of criminality, local disputes, ethnic tensions, and extremist ideology rather than religion alone.

“The fact that it was Christmas when we were trying to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ suggests Trump has his own agenda,” Ekhomu said. “He’s focused on Christians.”

The timing of the strikes, following weeks of U.S. reconnaissance flights tracked by open-source analysts, has only intensified suspicions that domestic U.S. political considerations played a role in the decision.

For now, Nigerian officials insist the operation was narrowly focused, intelligence-driven, and successful, with no civilian casualties. Yet lingering questions remain about whether the strikes will meaningfully weaken jihadist networks, risk inflaming local grievances, or mark the beginning of a more assertive U.S. military role in Nigeria’s northwest — a region already strained by banditry, porous borders, and the spillover of Sahelian instability.

As Washington and Abuja signal that further operations may be forthcoming, the challenge will be balancing counterterrorism cooperation with sovereignty concerns, accurate threat assessment, and avoiding narratives that oversimplify one of Africa’s most intricate security crises.