Lee Yong-cheol, chief of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, attends a ceremony at the Navy submarine command in Changwon, South Gyeongsang Province, South Korea, 25 March 2026. Photo by YONHAP / EPA
July 7 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s defense acquisition chief apologized Tuesday for failing to win Canada’s next-generation submarine project, saying alliance interoperability was the decisive factor in Ottawa’s decision.
Lee Yong-cheol, head of South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration, said South Korea’s submarine proposal was competitive on performance, delivery schedule and maintenance, but Canada placed greater weight on its long-standing NATO defense network.
“I am sorry that we were unable to achieve the expected result despite strong public interest and all-out support from the Industry Ministry, Defense Ministry, Foreign Ministry, Navy and other government agencies,” Lee told reporters at the Defense Ministry press room. “The failure to secure the result was due to my lack of ability.”
Canada selected Germany’s Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems as the preferred bidder for its Canadian Patrol Submarine Project, which aims to replace the Royal Canadian Navy’s aging submarine fleet.
Lee said Canada appeared to consider several factors, including fuel cell-based air-independent propulsion technology, battery performance, Germany’s record of supplying submarines to more than one-third of NATO members, alliance interoperability, crew sharing, joint training, maintenance, parts supply and industrial benefits tied to jobs and maintenance facilities.
“In terms of submarine performance, early delivery and regional benefits such as maintenance, repair and overhaul, I do not believe there was a meaningful gap with our proposal,” Lee said. “In delivery schedule, even considering Norway’s production slot, we were faster.”
“The decisive difference appears to have been NATO interoperability and cooperation that allows crew sharing,” he said.
A defense acquisition official said South Korea’s submarines should not be seen as inferior in operational capability.
“Submarines, for which stealth is most important, do not operate by constantly exchanging wireless communications,” the official said. “We do not believe our submarine had weaker operational capability. Canada appears to have judged that sharing future operating systems and parts would be relatively easier with Germany.”
The official said Canada’s geography and Arctic security concerns likely shaped the decision.
“Canada stretches across both ends of the North American continent and must cover both the Atlantic and Pacific,” the official said. “Personally, I think the difference in Arctic security priorities also played a major role. For South Korea, the Arctic is more of a conceptual issue, but for Canada it is a real security concern.”
The official said Canada’s Indo-Pacific defense cooperation with South Korea is still developing, while its Atlantic alliance structure has been operating for more than 70 years.
“Training among those allies is routine, to the point where they can discuss sharing submarine crew members,” the official said. “South Korea has only recently begun joint exercises with Canada. Canada chose to strengthen an existing alliance framework, and I think that strategic choice should be respected.”
The agency said the failed bid still produced meaningful results for South Korea’s defense industry.
Lee cited South Korea’s previous loss in Norway’s K2 tank procurement, saying the tank passed performance testing in harsh winter conditions but narrowly failed to win the contract.
“Poland took close note of that performance and moved aggressively to sign a contract,” Lee said. “This challenge may also lead to another reversal.”
— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI
© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.
Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260707010002453