Read also: “A time of uncertainty is coming.” The expert assesses the effects on Poland, Europe and China
What did Tuinman say?
Secretary of State February 15, 2026 in conversation with BNR Nieuwsradio he suggested that in an extreme situation, European countries could theoretically modify the fighter's software without US consent. According to a podcast recording from BNR Nieuwsradio, he said:
“I'm going to say something I should never say, but I'll do it anyway. Just like with the iPhone, you can jailbreak the F-35. I won't say any more about it.”.
—Gijs Tuinman, BNR Nieuwsradio
Tuinman didn't elaborate, suggesting he shouldn't say more — which only fueled speculation. Experts emphasize that his statement may be more metaphorical than technical, but the suggestion itself concerns the most sensitive element of the fighter: its source code and mission systems.
Another element in the European debate on military autonomy
Tuinman's comment was timely growing tensions between Europe and the Donald Trump administration. Amid discussions about possible limits to American support — logistical, technical and political — European countries began to re-examine their dependence on the USA and whether the F-35 software structure allows any modifications without US consent at all.
Tuinman did not suggest that any action was already underway. He noted that Washington has not made any decisions to suspend updates or parts deliveriesand his the statement concerned a purely hypothetical scenario. At the same time, he emphasized that the problem was of a nature structurala European dependence on the US in software remains a fact.
map of European countries that have or have ordered F-35 fighters
|
Business Insider
The Netherlands, for which F-35s are the country's only combat aircraft, is particularly sensitive to potential interruptions in American support in the delivery of software updates or access to mission data. As experts emphasize, The F-35's combat capability is highly dependent on regular updates and US supporting infrastructure.
Planned number of F-35s in European countries
|
Business Insider
Read also: This is what the Polish F-35 looks like. There is new news
From updates to combat missions, users are fully dependent on the US
The F‑35 operates on the basis of regular software updatesmission files (MDF) and a globally coordinated logistics and service system. Each of these elements is managed by the United States.
Lockheed Martin F-35A – the plane has a wingspan of 15.7 m, a length of almost 7 m and can carry over 8 tons of weapons
|
LockheedMartin
They have appeared in the media in the past speculations about a “kill switch”, a hidden mechanism that allows the US to turn off the F-35 with a single command. Although industry analyzes reject such a concept, the effectiveness of the F-35 is entirely related to cyclical American data packages and updates. The plane without them loses combat abilities over timebecause the software is responsible for:
- integration of new types of weapons,
- refreshing threat libraries,
- updates of sensors and self-defense systems,
- operation of mission data (MDF), which must be constantly replenished.
This is a fundamental relationship – and this is the point that Tuinman made when he compared that modifying the F-35 without US participation would require breaking their system of technological interdependence.
Can the F-35 be “broken”? Technical barrier and reality
According to available analyses, modifying the F-35 software without US consent is extremely difficult – if not impossible – for several reasons:
Complexity of systems
- The F‑35 source code spans over 8 million lines,
- is protected by multi-layer security,
- access to the full software architecture is strictly limited,
- access to machines is not enough, because modernization requires laboratories, among others. at the Eglin base
- Unauthorized modification attempts could result in loss of access to future updates
Centralization of updates
The fighters use American ALIS/ODIN systems, which are responsible for:
- software updates,
- logistics,
- mission planning,
- uploading MDF data files (including threat libraries).
No access for independent researchers
Various publications emphasize that the cybersecurity community does not have access to F-35 fighters, which makes any analysis of security gaps very difficult – unlike, for example, the ubiquitous iPhones
cracking the F-35 software may be more difficult than the iPhone software
|
Business Insider
Where is the real problem? Operational sovereignty
Tuinman's statement was not just a technical provocation, but touched on a key problem.
Europe does not have full control over the equipment that constitutes the foundation of its air defense.
Dependency on the US includes:
- logistical support,
- software updates,
- creating MDF,
- diagnostics and repairs,
- parts supply chain management.
Even if it were theoretically possible to break security, the consequences would be serious. Unauthorized modification could:
- block access to future US updates,
- prevent the integration of new weapons and systems,
- limit the development of the threat library,
- stop the modernization of stealth capabilities and sensors,
- keep the fleet at the current configuration level.
In other words, European countries could keep planes flying, but not fully ready for a modern battlefield.
However, at the end it is worth mentioning what else Gijs Tuinman said:
“The F-35 is a truly common product. The British produce Rolls-Royce engines, and the Americans simply need them too.”
Parts for the F-35 produced in Europe
|
F35.com
Read also: F-35 over Greenland. The Danish general says what NATO is preparing for
