In a dramatic escalation of his ongoing campaign to remake the global semiconductor industry in America’s image, former President Donald Trump on Thursday called for the immediate resignation of Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan, citing “highly conflicted” ties to China.

“There is no other solution to this problem,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, launching a public offensive against one of the world’s most influential tech executives.

The demand follows a letter from Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who raised national security concerns in a formal communication to Intel’s board chairman, Frank Yeary. Cotton alleged that Tan, who was appointed Intel CEO in March 2025, controls or holds stakes in hundreds of Chinese tech firms, including at least eight linked to China’s People’s Liberation Army.

“If true, this is not just a conflict of interest,” Cotton warned. “It’s a potential threat to national security.”

Tan, a veteran of the tech industry and former CEO of Cadence Design Systems, joined Intel amid mounting pressure on American firms to localize their chip production. But his deep investment ties to Asia—once seen as an asset—have now drawn intense scrutiny under Trump’s aggressive new trade agenda.

Trump’s public demand is part of a broader campaign to pressure semiconductor companies to move manufacturing to U.S. soil. On Wednesday, he vowed to impose a 100% tariff on all imported chips unless companies “make them—or at least plan to make them—here in America.”

That threat sent shockwaves through an industry already navigating geopolitical tensions, supply chain fragility, and the AI-fueled race to dominate next-generation computing.

Intel has so far declined to comment on either Trump’s post or Cotton’s letter. But the implications are profound.

According to a recent Reuters investigation cited by Cotton, Tan has invested in hundreds of Chinese tech firms over the years. That includes companies with documented ties to the Chinese Communist Party and military-industrial complex.

Tan’s former firm, Walden International, has not publicly responded to requests for clarification about its past or present holdings. Cotton’s letter asked whether Intel had vetted Tan’s background thoroughly—and whether it was aware of any subpoenas issued to Walden.

Industry analysts say the fallout from this controversy could further destabilize Intel, which has struggled for years to keep up with competitors like Nvidia, AMD, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC).

Intel’s previous CEO, Patrick Gelsinger, was ousted in December 2024 after the company failed to close the gap in the AI chip race. Under Gelsinger, Intel launched ambitious plans to build massive chip foundries in the U.S., supported in pairt by nearly $8 billion in grants from the Biden administration’s CHIPS Act.

However, even that funding was slashed amid concerns about Intel’s ability to deliver. According to The New York Times, the U.S. government reduced its original grant amount, fearing that Intel was overpromising and underperforming.

Today, Intel lags far behind its rivals in both valuation and market share. The company’s stock dropped over 2% on Thursday morning, wiping out all of its 2025 gains and widening the gap with competitors.

Trump’s critics have accused him of using national security concerns as a political cudgel—especially given that Intel received billions in taxpayer support just months ago. Others argue that scrutinizing foreign ties in the semiconductor space is not only fair, but essential.

“The chip war is no longer theoretical,” said Dr. Megan Rhee, a geopolitical analyst at the Center for Strategic Technology. “It’s happening in real time, and Trump is playing hardball. But the line between legitimate security concerns and political theater is blurring dangerously fast.”

Indeed, the political spotlight now burning over Intel threatens to derail more than just Tan’s tenure. Global chipmakers like Samsung, GlobalFoundries, and TSMC have already begun ramping up their U.S.-based manufacturing in anticipation of tougher trade restrictions—and to avoid the looming 100% tariffs.

In a landscape shaped by artificial intelligence, global rivalries, and fragile supply lines, Tan’s future—and Intel’s survival—may rest on whether the company can convince Washington that it’s still on America’s side.

For now, Intel remains silent. But as Trump sharpens his rhetoric and Cotton presses for answers, the pressure is mounting.

One executive. Billions in chips. And the future of AI caught in the middle.