Former Intel CEO calls for US sovereign wealth fund to counter China’s tech investments
Pat Gelsinger says America’s fragmented approach risks losing the tech race.
Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger has called on Washington to create a sovereign wealth fund aimed at safeguarding U.S. leadership in critical technologies, warning that America risks falling behind China without a more coordinated national investment strategy.
Writing in an op-ed published by the Wall Street Journal, Gelsinger argues that the U.S.’s “haphazard approach” to supporting strategic industries is no match for China’s state-directed spending on technologies such as quantum computing, artificial intelligence and advanced semiconductor manufacturing.
“China is already shaping its technological future through strategic investment,” Gelsinger wrote. “The U.S. can’t afford to cede leadership in technologies that will define the coming century.”
Sovereign wealth funds are common tools elsewhere. Norway’s Government Pension Fund Global, Singapore’s GIC and Abu Dhabi’s Mubadala have helped smaller or resource-rich nations build lasting strategic leverage by deploying state capital in global markets.
But in the U.S., the idea remains controversial, often dismissed as unnecessary government interference or industrial policy by another name. Gelsinger acknowledged those concerns, but argued that global examples prove such funds can be run transparently and without political meddling.
“The benefits far outweigh the risk,” he wrote, adding that the fund should be independent and focused on “commercial national research and defense priorities.”
Gelsinger’s warning comes amid growing concern in Washington and Silicon Valley that China’s combination of state-backed venture funds and industrial strategy could allow it to dominate future-defining technologies. Beijing’s National Venture Capital Guidance Fund alone channels tens of billions of dollars into sectors that China deems strategically vital, giving Chinese firms an edge over U.S. rivals that rely on private markets with shorter investment horizons.
“American firms have to grapple with difficult market distortions thanks to Chinese state investment,” Gelsinger wrote. “Our current model has fed notable innovations, but its focus is on short-term returns, not long-term competition.”
The former Intel chief pointed to quantum computing as a clear example of the gap. While U.S. companies like PsiQuantum and Google are global leaders in quantum breakthroughs, Gelsinger said patient, long-term capital is needed to help early-stage technologies scale, funding that Wall Street and traditional venture capital are often unwilling to provide.
He also warned that America’s reliance on overseas semiconductor supply chains remains a national security risk, despite the CHIPS Act passed in 2022. He argued that a sovereign wealth fund could complement legislation like the CHIPS Act by underwriting more research, investing directly in startups, and ensuring new supply chains are built on U.S. soil.
Under Gelsinger’s proposal, the fund would draw capital from Treasury funding, asset sales and repatriated profits, but operate independently to avoid political interference, an aspect he says critics are right to insist on.
Related articles:
He rejected the idea that a sovereign fund would crowd out private venture capital or pick market “winners.” Instead, he framed it as a tool to “bridge critical funding gaps between discovery and deployment,” ensuring breakthroughs developed by American scientists are commercialized in ways that strengthen national security and economic leadership.
The U.S. already has some public capital mechanisms, including the Defense Department’s Office of Strategic Capital, the Commerce Department’s Investment Accelerator and the International Development Finance Corp.’s equity authority, but Gelsinger described these as too fragmented and limited to counter China’s unified state approach.
“America has the talent, infrastructure and innovation culture to lead the world technologically,” he wrote. “Yet it’s missing a coherent, capital-backed strategy converting breakthroughs into national advantages.”
