On August 26, 2025, the typically quiet corridors of Microsoft’s executive offices in Redmond, Washington, were jolted by an act of protest that has since reverberated far beyond the tech giant’s walls. Two employees, Anna Hattle and Riki Fameli, joined five others in a sit-in at the office of Microsoft President Brad Smith, aiming to draw attention to the company’s business relationship with Israel amid the ongoing war in Gaza. The demonstration was organized by the activist group No Azure for Apartheid, whose very name references Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform and signals their core demand: that Microsoft sever its ties with Israel and pay reparations to Palestinians.
The protest did not last long before law enforcement intervened. All seven demonstrators were arrested, but the consequences for Hattle and Fameli went even further. The following day, August 27, both received voicemails notifying them of their termination from Microsoft. In a statement, the company cited “serious breaches of company policies and our code of conduct” related to what it described as “the break-in at the executive offices.” According to Reuters, the company made clear that the firings were a direct response to the sit-in, which it viewed as a violation of workplace norms and security protocols.
For Hattle and Fameli, however, the protest was about much more than company policy. “We are here because Microsoft continues to provide Israel with the tools it needs to commit genocide while gaslighting and misdirecting its own workers about this reality,” Hattle said in a statement released by No Azure for Apartheid on Wednesday. The group has been vocal in demanding that Microsoft not only end its business with Israel but also take responsibility for what they see as complicity in the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza.
The backdrop to these events is a joint media investigation that has cast a harsh spotlight on Microsoft’s technology and its role in Israeli surveillance operations. According to The Guardian, +972 Magazine, and Local Call, Israel’s military surveillance agency has been using Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform to store vast numbers of mobile phone call recordings from Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. The investigation detailed how Israeli authorities have relied on Microsoft’s cloud services for expansive surveillance of Palestinians, raising urgent questions about the ethical responsibilities of technology providers in conflict zones.
In response to the investigation, Microsoft announced earlier this month that it had engaged the law firm Covington & Burling LLP to conduct an independent review of its involvement. The move, reported by several outlets including Hindustan Times and Reuters, signals that the company is aware of the growing scrutiny and the need to address concerns both inside and outside its organization. However, for many activists and employees, this step falls short of the sweeping action they demand.
The August sit-in was not the first time Microsoft employees have protested the company’s ties to Israel. In April 2025, during Microsoft’s 50th anniversary celebration, AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman’s remarks were interrupted by a pro-Palestinian employee. That employee, along with another who protested, was also fired, according to The Hindu and other sources. The pattern is clear: Microsoft has responded to internal dissent on this issue with disciplinary measures, including suspensions and terminations.
Microsoft’s approach to protest has not been limited to firings. As reported by Calcalist and other outlets, the company has also sought assistance from the FBI to track protests, worked with local authorities to prevent demonstrations, flagged internal emails containing words like “Gaza,” and deleted some internal posts about the protests. Just last week, 20 people were arrested at the company’s Redmond headquarters after refusing police orders to disperse during another demonstration. These actions underscore the tension between employee activism and corporate governance at one of the world’s largest and most influential technology companies.
The protests at Microsoft are part of a broader wave of activism sweeping through the tech sector and beyond, as the humanitarian crisis in Gaza has intensified. Since October 2023, when Hamas militants attacked Israel—killing 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies—Israel has launched a devastating assault on Gaza. The result has been tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths, a hunger crisis, and the internal displacement of Gaza’s entire population. Images of starving children and widespread destruction have fueled global outrage and prompted accusations of genocide and war crimes at international courts, allegations that Israel has denied.
Other companies and educational institutions have also faced protests over their ties to Israel, reflecting the deep divisions and strong emotions the conflict has sparked worldwide. But Microsoft, as a provider of critical infrastructure and cloud services, finds itself at the center of a particularly fraught debate: What obligations do technology firms have when their tools are used in ways that may contribute to human rights abuses?
Microsoft President Brad Smith has tried to strike a careful balance. “We respect the freedom of expression that everyone in this country enjoys as long as they do it lawfully,” Smith said following the August sit-in, as reported by multiple outlets. The company’s official stance is that while it supports employees’ rights to express their views, it cannot tolerate actions that violate workplace rules or disrupt operations. For critics, however, this position is not enough to address the deeper ethical questions at play.
No Azure for Apartheid, the protest group at the heart of the latest demonstration, remains steadfast in its demands. They argue that Microsoft’s continued business with Israel makes it complicit in a system of surveillance and violence against Palestinians. Their calls for reparations and a complete severing of ties reflect a broader movement within the tech industry—one that insists companies must take responsibility for the downstream effects of their products and services.
As the humanitarian crisis in Gaza continues, and as technology becomes ever more intertwined with the machinery of modern conflict, the choices made by companies like Microsoft will likely face even greater scrutiny. For now, the firings of Anna Hattle and Riki Fameli stand as a stark reminder of the risks faced by employees who challenge their employers over matters of conscience—and of the difficult questions that remain unresolved at the intersection of business, technology, and human rights.
In a world where the lines between technology and geopolitics grow ever blurrier, Microsoft’s latest internal reckoning may be just the beginning of a much larger conversation.
