| Welcome to Global Village Space

Tuesday, April 8, 2025

Microsoft fires two engineers over protests against AI contracts with Israeli military

In February, five other Microsoft employees were removed from a meeting with Nadella after raising similar concerns.

Microsoft has dismissed two software engineers who staged high-profile protests against the company’s contracts with the Israeli military, citing “wilful misconduct” and disruption of business operations. The firings, which occurred in the aftermath of Microsoft’s 50th anniversary celebrations in Redmond, Washington, have reignited debate over Big Tech’s role in global conflict and the boundaries of employee activism.

Protest at Microsoft’s Milestone Event

The first disruption occurred during a keynote speech by Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman. Ibtihal Aboussad, a Canadian-based engineer in Microsoft’s AI division, stood up during the livestreamed event and shouted, “Mustafa, shame on you. Microsoft powers this genocide in our region.” She called Suleyman a “war profiteer” before throwing a keffiyeh scarf onstage and being escorted out by security.

Read More: Skype Bids Farewell as Microsoft Shifts Focus to Teams

Shortly afterward, Vaniya Agrawal, a U.S.-based engineer, interrupted a separate session featuring CEO Satya Nadella, co-founder Bill Gates, and former CEO Steve Ballmer. Agrawal criticized the company’s role as a “digital weapons manufacturer” complicit in “surveillance, apartheid, and genocide.” Both engineers were affiliated with No Azure for Apartheid, a group of Microsoft employees advocating against the company’s business dealings with the Israeli government. The group claims the contracts help power Israel’s military operations in Gaza and Lebanon.

Immediate Terminations Follow

Aboussad was officially terminated on Monday by Microsoft Canada. In internal communications obtained by multiple media outlets, Microsoft cited “wilful misconduct, disobedience or wilful neglect of duty.” The company also said her email to senior executives—including Nadella, Brad Smith, and Suleyman—constituted an “admission” of her intent to disrupt the event.

“You chose to intentionally disrupt the speech of Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman,” Microsoft wrote in her termination notice. “Your misconduct was designed to gain notoriety and cause maximum disruption to this highly anticipated event.” Agrawal had previously submitted her resignation, effective April 11, but Microsoft terminated her employment early, informing her that her role would end immediately. She too had sent a detailed email to executives following her protest, accusing Microsoft of being “complicit” in human rights abuses through its AI technology.

Broader Context: AI and Armed Conflict

The protests followed a recent report indicating that Microsoft and OpenAI technologies were being used in Israeli military targeting operations. Although Microsoft has not confirmed these allegations, it stated, “We provide many avenues for all voices to be heard. However, this must be done without disrupting business.”

In February, five other Microsoft employees were removed from a meeting with Nadella after raising similar concerns. The company’s handling of internal dissent is drawing comparisons to Google, where dozens of employees were fired in 2024 for staging sit-ins against Project Nimbus—a $1.2 billion AI deal with the Israeli government.

Accusations of Retaliation

Human rights groups and labor advocates have criticized Microsoft’s actions, calling them retaliatory. No Azure for Apartheid has demanded the reinstatement of Aboussad and Agrawal, stating that the two engineers were whistleblowers speaking out against human rights violations.

Read More: Elon Musk confirms X will hide like reactions on posts

Microsoft’s response, however, suggests it sees the matter strictly as a workplace policy issue. “We ask that this be done in a way that does not cause a business disruption,” a company spokesperson said. “If that happens, we ask participants to relocate. Still, many observers argue the company’s actions may chill future dissent, raising urgent questions about the ethical responsibilities of tech workers and the corporations they serve.