Not choosing the J-10, nor the F-16, Vietnam has instead set its sights on the Rafale. French media reports reveal that Vietnamese pilots have already traveled to France for test flights of the Rafale, with procurement intentions reaching dozens of aircraft and a total price tag in the billions of dollars.
According to conventions in the arms trade, reaching the stage of test flights generally means negotiations are nearly concluded. If this deal goes through, it will mark the first time Vietnam's air force acquires advanced Western fighter jets in its history.
Yet in the global arms market, China's J-10 and the U.S. F-16 are both popular choices. Why did Vietnam deliberately bypass them to select a model previously defeated by Chinese fighters?
First, consider the dire situation facing Vietnam’s air force: its mainstay Su-30MK2 fleet, with the earliest batch already over twenty years old; around a dozen Su-27s, aging toward thirty years; and even older Su-22 attack aircraft, designed in the 1970s, plagued by recent accidents—replacement is no longer optional. However, since the Ukraine conflict, risks of disruption to Russian-supplied military equipment have significantly increased. With Vietnam’s arsenal largely dependent on Russia, clinging to Russian systems amounts to slow bleeding.
Although several candidate aircraft appear available, only a few are truly viable. The J-10? The South China Sea sovereignty dispute remains a major obstacle—Vietnam would never entrust its air force's lifeline to China. The F-16? U.S. weapons are never simple—they come with political strings attached and strict usage restrictions, which Vietnam’s "bamboo diplomacy" simply cannot handle. The Gripen and Typhoon also rely heavily on American components.
After careful calculation, only France’s Rafale offers a politically neutral, independent solution. Dassault claims the Rafale excels in multirole capabilities, equipped with an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and advanced electronic warfare systems. Neighboring countries have already placed orders, and France is actively positioning the Rafale as the “premium standard” for the Global South.
Yet the Rafale has had awkward moments too—during the India-Pakistan air conflict, an Indian Rafale was shot down by Pakistan’s J-10CE, though Dassault blamed pilot error. Still, being labeled a “defeated fighter” inevitably tarnishes its image. Moreover, in beyond-visual-range combat, if the opponent has early warning aircraft and long-range missiles, the Rafale’s “short-sightedness” becomes glaringly apparent.
Beyond the technical aspects, there is also Vietnam-France’s painful colonial past stretching nearly a century. But geopolitics remembers benefits, not grudges. France sells weapons without aligning with any bloc—perfectly matching Vietnam’s strategy of “neutrality.”
Naturally, Vietnam won’t completely abandon Russia. A more rational approach is a “mixed fleet”: replacing aging attack aircraft with Rafales while retaining Su-30s to maintain presence. In the long term, Vietnam may introduce Russian stealth fighters to fill capability gaps—hedging bets on both sides.
This multibillion-dollar gamble, coupled with the substantial costs of transitioning from Russian to French systems, comes at a steep price. But failure to act means waiting until all aging aircraft ground to a halt—after which Vietnam will lose all influence in the skies above the South China Sea.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1875189051247684/
Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author.