Former Intel CEO Craig Barrett has voiced strong opposition to splitting Intel’s business into two separate entities, arguing that such a move would be counterproductive, particularly as the company is on the cusp of a technological breakthrough that could help it catch up with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC).

In his opinion piece published in Fortune, Barrett rebuffed calls from a group of former Intel directors who suggested dividing the chip giant as a defensive measure against a potential TSMC takeover. Instead, he emphasized the need for Intel to double down on its 18A process technology, which is expected to rival TSMC’s N2 process node.

Focus on Technology, Not Distraction

Barrett argued that Intel’s foundry business struggles in recent years were not due to customer trust issues but rather because it lacked the necessary technology to compete effectively with TSMC. The former CEO highlighted that Intel’s newfound success with its 18A process technology demonstrates the company’s potential to reclaim its leadership in the semiconductor industry.

“Splitting off the foundry will only serve as a distraction and introduce complications,” Barrett wrote. Instead, he advised Intel to prioritize the 18A node while ensuring good customer service, fair pricing, guaranteed capacity, and a clear separation of chip designers from their foundry customers.

A Swipe at the Board and the Push for Gelsinger’s Return

Beyond advocating for a unified Intel, Barrett did not hold back his criticism of the company’s board, accusing it of being responsible for Intel’s struggles over the last decade. He suggested that the board’s actions, including the ouster of Pat Gelsinger as CEO in December, were misguided.

“In my opinion, a far better move might be to fire the Intel board and rehire Pat Gelsinger to finish the job he has aptly handled over the past few years,” Barrett said.

The former CEO noted that while the board members who suggested splitting Intel may have good intentions, they lacked experience in managing a semiconductor business. He characterized them as academics and former government bureaucrats, suggesting they were out of their depth in making strategic decisions for Intel.

Pat Gelsinger’s tenure as CEO was marked by significant strides in technology development, particularly with the 18A process node. Under his leadership, Intel made progress in catching up with its competitors, especially TSMC, which has dominated the industry with its advanced chip manufacturing technologies.

Developing new chip technologies and setting up production is a process that takes years, and Gelsinger has been laying the groundwork for Intel’s recovery. Barrett’s remarks underscore a growing sentiment among industry insiders that Gelsinger’s exit was premature and that his vision could have steered Intel toward sustained success.

Industry analysts have also echoed Barrett’s concerns, with many believing that a split could hinder Intel’s recovery strategy. Splitting the foundry business from the chip design unit might lead to a loss of synergy, weakening the company’s position against competitors like TSMC and Samsung.

Barrett’s comments come at a critical time when Intel needs stability and visionary leadership.

Intel’s efforts to rebound from a decade-long slump have so far failed to produce tangible results. His call to rehire Gelsinger is a bold proposal, denoting a lack of confidence in the company’s current direction.

The company’s foundry business, which was expected to provide a competitive edge, has not yet made significant strides against industry leader TSMC. Despite recent advancements in 18A process technology, which were meant to put Intel on par with TSMC’s N2 process node, the board’s impatience with slow progress led to the sacking of CEO Pat Gelsinger in December.

Barrett’s statements underline a growing concern about the lack of a clear strategy to revive Intel’s fortunes. The company, once a market leader, now appears rudderless, with no well-defined plan to reclaim its position. Analysts note that while the 18A process technology is promising, Intel still faces significant challenges in production scaling, customer acquisition, and market competitiveness.

International Women’s Day is a moment to recognise and honour the contributions of women across various spheres of life. In the world of music, African female artists have broken barriers, challenged norms, and reshaped the landscape of Afrobeats and Amapiano. These dynamic women continue to push boundaries, ensuring that their voices are heard on the global stage while inspiring future generations of female musicians, especially in Africa or of African roots.

Trailblazers of Afrobeats

Afrobeats, a genre that has taken the world by storm, has seen the rise of incredibly talented female artists who have cemented their place in an industry often dominated by men. Icons like Tiwa Savage, Yemi Alade, and Tems have not only delivered chart-topping hits but have also used their platforms to advocate for gender equality and social change. Their success has paved the way for emerging artists such as Ayra Starr, Fave, and Bloody Civilian, who are redefining the sound of contemporary African music.

Tiwa Savage, often referred to as the “Queen of Afrobeats,” has consistently delivered groundbreaking performances, from collaborating with international stars to performing on global stages like the MTV Europe Music Awards. Meanwhile, Tems’ soulful voice and unique artistry have earned her a Grammy, marking a significant milestone for African women in music. In 2025, Ayra Starr won Best African Music Act and Best International Act at the MOBO Awards, further solidifying her place among the industry’s elite (The Guardian).

Queens of Amapiano

Amapiano, the South African-born genre, has gained immense popularity worldwide, and female artists have played a crucial role in its success. From Sha Sha, the first woman to win a BET Award for Best New International Act, to DBN Gogo, who has dominated DJ booths and festival lineups, women are ensuring that their influence in the genre is undeniable.

Artists such as Uncle Waffles have also gained international recognition, turning the DJing scene on its head with her electrifying performances and viral social media presence. South African sensation Tyla made history at the 2024 MTV Europe Music Awards (EMAs), winning Best Afrobeats Artist, Best African Act, and Best R&B Artist, surpassing established names like Burna Boy, Asake, and Ayra Starr (Medium).

Breaking Barriers and Shaping the Future

Despite the challenges of navigating a male-dominated industry, African female artists in Afrobeats and Amapiano continue to challenge stereotypes and redefine success. They have built loyal fanbases, headlined international tours, and collaborated with some of the biggest names in global music.

British-Nigerian rapper and singer Darkoo (born Oluwafisayo Isa), who gained prominence with her hit single Gangsta, continues to soar. At the 2025 MOBO Awards, she won Best Female Act and Song of the Year for Favourite Girl, a track that has accumulated millions of streams globally, including a remix featuring Rema (The Guardian).

Meanwhile, Grammy Award-winning artist Tems continues to expand her influence beyond music. She recently joined the ownership group of San Diego FC, a major move that showcases the growing intersection of music, sports, and entertainment (Goal).

On this International Women’s Day, we celebrate these extraordinary women who continue to innovate, inspire, and uplift African music. Their resilience, creativity, and undeniable talent serve as a beacon of hope for aspiring female musicians across the continent and beyond.

Here’s to African women in music—bold, brilliant, and unstoppable!

Read more: https://www.tekedia.com/pop-culture-africa-a-narrative-on-afrobeat-afrobeats-and-highlife/

Mr. Zelensky: When a war is fought on your land, you can hardly win; you only fight to survive. I am happy to read that you have regretted your aggressive posture in the White House Oval House and discarded the noise from people who praised you for speaking “truth” to power. Which truth? And to who? The person that will send you the next weapons?

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said his Oval Office meeting last week with US President Donald Trump “did not go the way it was supposed to,” describing the fiery meeting as “regrettable” and noting that Ukraine is ready to negotiate about an end to the conflict.

“I would like to reiterate Ukraine’s commitment to peace,” Zelensky said on X, addressing his remarkable sit-down with Trump directly. Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated Zelensky during the meeting, angrily accusing him of “gambling with World War Three” and telling him: “Your country is in big trouble.”

“Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be,” Zelensky wrote in Tuesday’s X post. “It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is time to make things right. We would like future cooperation and communication to be constructive.”

Many knew that on your way back to Ukraine, from the US, that Trump would freeze shipment of weapons to your country. And once that memo is received in your capital, you will understand that leadership is not about how you feel but what is the best option at any point in time. Some  options available under Biden are no more available under Trump, and that means you have to modulate. Change your posture because the game has changed.

Finally, do not think any person really cares. Geopolitics is driven by interests and those interests evolve. Britain, which is championing you, after the mess in the Oval Office, supervised the starvation of one million kids in my place during the Biafran war. Biafran kids, from its perspectives, did not have rights and many of those kids fell due to kwashiorkor, not bullets, arising from a food embargo approved in London and executed by the Nigerian armed forces. According to the New York Times archives, the then UK Prime Minister was fine provided it got the war solved fast!

Check Gaza, do you think morals work there? Provided interests are aligned, anything is permissible. Simply, humans are not equal.  I just want you to be careful before they switch on Ukraine. But with the “regrettable” statement, I think you are getting it back. Only three countries – US, China and Russia – can fight wars for years without a need to purchase huge stocks of weapons from others. One is your adversary, and that is to tell you the scale of your options. Be realistic and save your country! It’s about time.