Let's start with what should concern nobody: Jensen Huang's marriage. A CEO who cheats on his wife is a matter for him and his family, not for shareholders or journalists. If that were the whole story, it would have ended with the apology he sent employees on Sunday. But it is not the whole story, and Nvidia is doing everything it can to make us think it is.
The story is this: according to reports in the US, US intelligence officials regard the woman Huang had a relationship with as a Chinese intelligence asset. She was a senior figure at Megaspeed, a large Nvidia customer investigated on suspicion of smuggling chips to China. And according to The New York Times, the Commerce Department's investigation was halted after Nvidia's general counsel contacted the investigators. None of this has been proven, and everyone involved denies wrongdoing. But these are exactly the questions a real investigation must answer.
And what did the board do? It announced a committee of independent directors, and in the same statement already determined it has 'no reason to believe' national security or company secrets were compromised, and expressed confidence in the CEO's leadership. That is the wrong order. An inquiry whose conclusion is published along with the announcement of its creation is not an inquiry, it is a press release. When a board commits to confidence in advance, it is hard to believe it will find anything to undermine it.
It is easy to see why. Huang is not just any CEO. He founded the company, has led it for more than thirty years and turned it from a maker of graphics cards for gamers into a company worth trillions. He is also Nvidia's personal link to the White House, and the president has already rushed to defend him. In a company like this, the board fears the damage of the founder leaving more than anything else. But that is exactly a board's job: to ask the uncomfortable questions even when the answer may be costly.
What should happen? First, until the review ends, Huang should step back from any decision involving customers in China and Southeast Asia and from contact with regulators on export matters. Second, the findings should be published, not just the bottom line. And third, Nvidia should explain publicly why its general counsel contacted federal investigators in a customer's case, and what exactly was said. If everything is in order, the company has nothing to hide.
And we in Israel have a special reason to demand this. Thousands of Israelis work at Nvidia, hold its stock and build careers on it. If the affair ends in a dramatic tightening of export restrictions or a management shock, they will feel it first. The calm the board is trying to create now does not protect them. What protects them is a real investigation, even if it uncovers things nobody wants to hear.
