Intel at a crossroads: how the US government wants to save the chip giant

Intel, the American company that defined the standards of the semiconductor industry for decades, is now at a critical moment in its existence, according to an article published by Tagesschau, the news website of the German television ARD, which also claims that from the glory years when it dominated the microprocessor market to the current collapse of its stock value, the path of the American giant has been marked by a lack of rapid adaptation to new technological directions.

According to the cited source, if Intel shares were trading at almost 45 euros a year and a half ago, today their value barely exceeds 20 euros, while rivals such as Nvidia have not only grown spectacularly, but have also climbed to the top of the world hierarchy.

The authors of the article claim that the explanation is simple and painful: Intel still has solid products, but it has failed to establish itself in the sectors where the future is at stake: artificial intelligence, electric mobility and data center infrastructure. According to the cited source, Intel missed the right moment, and now it is paying dearly. The project for the chip factory in Magdeburg (Germany) has been abandoned, thousands of jobs have disappeared, and financial reports bring red numbers rather than hopes of recovery. In this vacuum of power and strategy, the US administration led by Donald Trump has taken an unexpected step: it announced its intention to buy approximately 10% of Intel shares. Officially, the objectives are clear: to bring chip production back to the United States, reduce dependence on Asia and create new jobs. Unofficially, however, the decision has a strong geopolitical dimension. Faced with the explosive rise of Chinese companies and the risk of conflict in the Taiwan area, the White House wants to ensure that technology vital to the economy and defense remains under American control.

The meeting between Trump and Lip-Bu Tan, the current CEO of Intel, shows how seriously Washington is treating this issue. From public criticism of the manager's alleged ties to Chinese companies to unexpected praise after the White House discussions, everything points to a strategic message: Intel must remain an American pillar, no matter the cost.

For the company, the entry of the US government and SoftBank into the shareholders may mean an infusion of capital and a temporary shield against collapse. But money, no matter how much it is, cannot replace innovation. Intel's future will depend on the ability of the management team to regain lost direction and deliver competitive products in the segments where the future of global technology is at stake.

Beyond the specific case of Intel, this intervention marks a possible turning point for the American economy: a state that, after decades of preaching the free market, decides to directly enter the game and influence the course of strategic companies. If this model extends to other giants in critical infrastructure, we could witness a profound redefinition of American capitalism.

For Intel, however, the big question remains: will this outstretched hand be a real chance for rebirth or just the prelude to a prolonged agony?