Intel Corporation

Key Findings

• Economic: Intel has maintained Israeli R&D and manufacturing operations since 1974 and retains voting control of Mobileye. The announced Kiryat Gat Fab 38 expansion was awarded a $3.2 billion state grant and included a local-procurement commitment, but construction was later paused; the announced project value is not completed expenditure.^{1, 2, 3, 4}
• Digital: Intel Capital has invested directly in Israeli technology and cybersecurity ventures. Separately, Elbit’s ETC MK7/MK7+ line incorporates commercial Intel processors, with series-level IDF use; neither record establishes a direct Intel–IDF contract or verified Intel surveillance deployment.^{5, 6, 7, 8}
• Political: Intel’s board opposed Israel-related accountability proposals in the 2025 and 2026 proxy cycles. The cited 2026 recommendation establishes the board’s position, not the subsequent shareholder vote outcome.^{9, 10}
• Not found: No public evidence identified of a direct Intel or Intel Israel procurement contract with the IDF, IMOD, Israel Prison Service, Border Police, or another Israeli security body; nor of Intel operations in West Bank, East Jerusalem, or Golan Heights settlements.^{11, 12}

Target Profile

Key Facts:

• Intel’s first development centre outside the United States opened in Haifa in 1974.¹⁴
• Intel reports facilities in Haifa, Petah Tikva, Yakum, Jerusalem, and Kiryat Gat; its Israel page reports 9,335 employees.¹⁵
• Intel’s Israeli group includes Intel Israel (74) Ltd.; Mobileye remains an Intel-controlled subsidiary headquartered principally in Israel.^{13, 3}

Executive Summary

Intel’s documented Israel/Palestine nexus is principally economic and operational. The company has operated in Israel since 1974 and maintains semiconductor manufacturing and R&D/design operations there, including the Kiryat Gat complex. The December 2023 Fab 38 expansion was paired with a $3.2–3.25 billion Israeli government grant, preferential tax treatment, and a commitment to procure approximately NIS 60 billion in goods and services from Israeli suppliers over the following decade.^{1, 2, 18} The expansion’s construction was halted or suspended in June 2024 and was later reported frozen for the foreseeable future; the underlying Israeli footprint continued to operate.^{4, 19}

The documented military-adjacent nexus is narrower. Elbit Systems’ ETC MK7 and later MK7+ materials identify Intel Core i7 hardware in a tactical-computer line used for command-and-control and tactical-data dissemination; the updated material identifies series-level use by armed forces including the IDF.^{5, 6} This establishes downstream incorporation of commercial off-the-shelf Intel silicon. It does not establish a direct Intel–Elbit supply agreement, a direct Intel–IDF or Intel–IMOD procurement contract, a bespoke military processor, or a disclosed end-user supply route.^{5, 11}

Intel has also participated in Israel’s technology ecosystem through acquisitions including Mobileye, Habana Labs, Moovit, and Granulate; Intel Capital investment activity; a 2017 Team8 affiliation; and a 2019 management-and-innovation course involving Israel Aerospace Industries and the Israeli Air Force.^{3, 20, 21} These facts demonstrate material economic and technology-ecosystem ties, but the audits do not establish that these activities amount to military procurement, weapons-system co-production, or Israeli state-security deployment.

The audits record wartime support for Israeli employees after October 2023 and employee/Foundation-linked urgent aid. They also record Intel leadership communications expressing concern for Israel-based staff.^{22, 23, 17} No public evidence was identified of direct Intel donations to named military-welfare or settlement-linked organisations, of free cloud or logistics support to Israeli state bodies, or of a corporate statement specifically addressing Palestinian civilian casualties, Gaza’s humanitarian situation, or a ceasefire.^{24, 25}

Under the human-reviewed V6.5 methodology, Intel receives a BRS of 712, placing it in Tier B (Severe Complicity). The governing economic scenario is its acquisition and continuing control of Israeli-founded Mobileye: the $15.3 billion acquisition establishes scale, while voting control and senior Intel directors establish controller proximity.^{3, 26} Intel’s wider manufacturing footprint provides additional economic context; the paused Fab 38 announcement is not treated as completed expenditure.^{1, 4}

Timeline of Relevant Events

Corporate Overview

Intel Corporation is a United States semiconductor company headquartered in Santa Clara, California, with global wafer-manufacturing and R&D operations that include Israel.^{14, 15} Its long-standing Israeli presence comprises development centres in Haifa, Petah Tikva, Yakum, and Jerusalem, as well as Kiryat Gat manufacturing operations.¹⁵

The Israeli corporate footprint includes Intel Israel (74) Ltd. and other identified group entities, including Intel Electronics Ltd., Hampton Acquisition Ltd., Intel Semi Conductors Ltd., Intel Mobile Communications Israel Ltd., and Granulate Cloud Solutions Ltd.^{13, 33} Mobileye remains Intel-controlled, while continuing as a separately registered public company.³

Intel’s Israeli acquisitions include Mobileye, Habana Labs, Moovit, and Granulate.^{3, 29, 34} The proposed acquisition of Tower Semiconductor was terminated in August 2023 after timely Chinese regulatory approval was not secured; Tower remains independent and no current ownership relationship exists.³⁵ Intel’s Fab 38 expansion remains reported as paused or frozen; this mitigation applies to that expansion, not to the company’s continuing Israeli manufacturing and R&D operations.^{4, 19}

Kiryat Gat lies within Israel’s pre-1967 territory, not in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, or the Golan Heights. NGO sources cited in the audits describe the location as associated with Palestinian villages depopulated in 1948; this is a historical land-history allegation and is distinct from post-1967 settlement activity.^{36, 37} No public evidence identified of Intel facilities, offices, distributors, or authorised resellers specifically located in West Bank, East Jerusalem, or Golan Heights settlements.^{12, 38}

Domain Summaries

Military: Military

Mechanism of Involvement

The verified military-adjacent evidence is downstream product integration. Elbit’s ETC MK7 tactical computer lists an Intel i7 Quad Core processor as a commercial off-the-shelf component. Elbit’s updated MK7+ brochure identifies an Intel Core i7-1370 processor and states that the ETC series is used by armed forces including the IDF for command-and-control and tactical-data dissemination across tanks and other combat vehicles.^{5, 6}

Intel, IAI, and the Israeli Air Force also participated in a May 2019 course for managers and innovation leaders. The available material verifies an educational initiative, not a procurement award, weapons programme, technical transfer, or ongoing operational relationship.²¹

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

No public evidence identified of a direct Intel Corporation or Intel Israel contract, tender award, framework agreement, or memorandum of understanding with the IMOD, IDF, Israel Prison Service, Border Police, or another Israeli state-security body.¹¹ The accessible IMOD vendor portal does not identify Intel, although the audit notes that public absence cannot rule out non-public commercial sales.³⁹

The ETC evidence supports commercial Intel silicon embedded in a third-party tactical product; it does not identify Intel as Elbit’s direct vendor, disclose volumes, establish co-development, or prove a direct Intel military sale.^{5, 6} The specific claim that ETC MK7 itself was deployed on Merkava Mk.4 tanks remains uncorroborated in accessible primary material.⁵

No public evidence identified of Intel manufacturing lethal platforms, ammunition, missile-defence subsystems, targeting or guidance systems, or purpose-built kinetic-targeting software for Israeli forces.⁴⁰ No reliable primary or manufacturer source retrieved identifies Intel or Altera hardware in Iron Dome, David’s Sling, Arrow, or related Israeli air-defence systems.⁴⁰ Altera activity after 12 September 2025 should not automatically be attributed to Intel as activity of a controlled group entity.³²

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Digital: Digital

Mechanism of Involvement

Intel’s Israeli footprint includes hardware, software, communications, AI, autonomous-driving, and semiconductor R&D activities, reinforced by acquisitions and venture investment.^{15, 3, 20, 29} Intel collaborated with Technion on an AI research centre announced in 2018; the cited release establishes the announcement, not the centre’s operating status in 2026.⁴²

The governing digital scenario concerns Intel Capital’s direct investment in Israeli technology ventures, including cybersecurity companies Alcide and Intezer, together with its documented portfolio and Team8 backing.^{20, 7, 8, 43} Historical reporting describes $120 million invested across 14 Israeli companies in 2018; these figures do not establish annual 2026 expenditure or that every historical portfolio relationship remains active.⁸ The approved score treats this as capital support for the technology ecosystem; it does not treat investment as Intel procurement, or infer surveillance, intelligence, or state deployment.

The Elbit ETC hardware integration is also a digital and dual-use nexus: a commercial processor is embedded in a tactical-computing product used for command-and-control and tactical-data functions.^{5, 6} Intel’s Team8 affiliation links it to a cybersecurity company-building venture founded by a former Unit 8200 veteran, but the evidence does not establish an IMOD/IDF customer, weapons programme, or present relationship.²⁰

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

No public evidence identified that Intel operates cloud infrastructure in Israel for external customers, participates as a Project Nimbus contractor, or supplies chips, services, or infrastructure specifically under Project Nimbus.⁴⁴ No public evidence identified of direct Intel provision of AI/ML, computer-vision, autonomous decision-support, offensive cyber, zero-day, target-generation, or surveillance systems to named Israeli state, military, or security bodies.^{44, 45}

Who Profits lists Intel as an undifferentiated “partner” of Rad-Bynet and AnyVision/Oosto, but does not explain the relationship’s nature. No public evidence identified that Intel or Intel Capital held an equity stake in AnyVision, or that Intel had verified procurement, resale, or deployment relationships with Trigo or BriefCam.^{46, 47}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Economic: Economic

Mechanism of Involvement

Intel’s economic nexus is extensive. It has operated in Israel since 1974, employs thousands of people there, and maintains major R&D and manufacturing operations.^{14, 15} Intel’s Israel page reports 9,335 employees, $27 billion in cumulative capital investment through 2021, and $86 billion in cumulative exports through 2023; these are dated cumulative measures, not annual 2026 figures.¹⁵

The December 2023 Fab 38 project was associated with a $3.2–3.25 billion government grant, preferential tax status, and a commitment to buy approximately NIS 60 billion in goods and services from Israeli suppliers over a decade.^{1, 2, 18} Intel’s past reciprocal-procurement arrangements likewise tied its industrial presence to Israeli supplier purchasing.^{27, 28}

Intel’s acquisition and ownership activity includes Mobileye, Habana Labs, Moovit, and Granulate, as well as Intel Capital’s investments in Israeli startups.^{3, 29, 34, 8} Intel acquired Mobileye for $15.3 billion in 2017.²⁶ Mobileye’s 2025 Form 10-K reports Intel ownership of 79.5% of common stock and 97.3% of voting power at 27 December 2025, followed by approximately 77% and 96.9% respectively as of 3 February 2026. The filing also identifies three senior Intel managers on Mobileye’s board and its controlled-company status. These facts establish continuing control despite Mobileye’s separate public listing; the score does not classify Intel itself as Israeli-founded.³

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The Fab 38 expansion was halted or suspended in June 2024 and reported frozen for the foreseeable future.^{4, 19} The audit treats this as mitigation for the future expansion, while noting that Intel’s established Israeli workforce and existing facilities continue to operate.^{15, 19}

No public evidence identified of Intel sourcing Israeli agricultural produce or settlement-origin commodities, of a distinct Israel revenue line in reviewed SEC geographic disclosures, or of Israeli state equity ownership or government-appointed directors at Intel.^{48, 49} The Tower transaction ended in 2023 and does not create a current Intel ownership relationship.³⁵

No public evidence identified of Intel offices, retail operations, resellers, or authorised distributors specifically in West Bank settlements or the Golan Heights.^{12, 38} The Kiryat Gat land-history evidence concerns territory within the 1949 Armistice Line; it should not be presented as evidence of a post-1967 settlement operation.^{36, 37}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Political: Political

Mechanism of Involvement

Intel’s political nexus is documented through corporate governance decisions, public communications, post-7 October employee support, and the state framing of its investment. On 8 October 2023, then-CEO Gelsinger addressed concern to Intel workers in Israel and those with family and friends in the region; in October 2024 he said Intel would keep looking out for Israeli staff.^{17, 23} Intel Israel and the Intel Foundation reported approximately ₪4 million in urgent aid and ₪4.4 million in employee-directed donations and matching grants for 2023; these are dated reporting amounts. Intel also provided employee cash support, including a one-time $5,000 wartime grant.^{22, 25}

Israeli state officials publicly described Intel’s December 2023 investment as evidence of international confidence and as significant for Israel’s economy. Those are state-actor characterisations, not Intel’s own public rationale.⁵¹ Intel’s board opposed, and shareholders rejected, the 2025 Ethical Impact Assessment proposal concerning Israeli operations; the 2026 proxy records board opposition to a human-rights due-diligence proposal but does not establish the subsequent vote outcome.^{9, 31, 10}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

No public evidence identified of Intel corporate donations to FIDF, JNF/KKL, Lev Echad, Regavim, Im Tirtzu, or other named military-welfare or settlement-linked organisations.²⁵ No public evidence identified of Intel PAC contributions specifically linked to Israel-policy or anti-BDS legislation, of Intel sponsorship of AIPAC’s Policy Conference, or of Intel directing free cloud credits, logistics, flights, or infrastructure to the IDF or Israeli state during the conflict.^{52, 25}

No public evidence identified of an Intel corporate statement specifically addressing Palestinian civilian casualties, Gaza’s humanitarian situation, or calling for a ceasefire.²⁴ The audit contrasts this absence with Intel’s named public condemnation of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and related relief support, but that comparison does not itself establish an unlawful act or a direct security relationship.⁵³

Named Entities and Evidence Map

BDS-1000 Score

Method: V6.5.

• V_MAX: 8.00 Avg_OTHERS: 2.72
• BRS Score: 712 Tier: B (Severe Complicity)

V_MAX is driven by the acquired-identity Mobileye scenario in Economic: Mobileye’s Israeli-founded operating identity, the $15.3 billion acquisition, and Intel’s voting control and management overlap support the approved I8.0/M9.5/P8.5 assessment.^{3, 26} Digital assesses Intel Capital’s documented capital support; Political assesses repeated board opposition to accountability proposals. Military remains limited to downstream commercial-processor integration, with the direct supply route unverified.^{5, 6, 9, 10, 7, 8} These are the fixed, human-reviewed V6.5 scores.

The scoring framework is scale-free and evidence-only. It assesses documented activity type, scale, and directness, with adverse and exculpatory evidence retained rather than inferred beyond the audits.

Methodology Note

• Evidence is limited to the four supplied domain audits and the audit-linked sources cited in these end notes.
• Impact assesses the documented activity type; M assesses scale; P assesses directness. Scores are fixed, human-vetted V6.5 values.
• Direct attribution is required: corporate ownership, contracts, supply routes, or operational roles are not inferred through unrelated entities or broad ecosystem association.
• Divested, exited, terminated, or paused operations are treated as mitigation where the audits establish that status; they are not attributed as current controlled activity.^{4, 19, 32, 35}
• Settlement-linked operation may be relevant to both Economic and Political, but the audits identify no verified Intel facility or reseller in West Bank, East Jerusalem, or Golan Heights settlements.^{12, 38}
• “No public evidence identified” records the result of the audits’ specified public-source checks; it does not prove that non-public activity is impossible.^{11, 39}