It is hard to see the point of employees occupying their own company’s headquarters to protest contracts with Israel. Microsoft is not a government and it does not set foreign policy. It is a technology firm with clients that include many countries, including allies of the United States. Israel is one of those allies. Refusing to sell software or cloud services to Israel would not bring peace, it would simply undermine Microsoft’s ability to serve a lawful customer in line with international trade rules.

The workers demanding this kind of boycott ignore that Israel is a democratic state facing real security threats. They also ignore that their salaries and benefits come from contracts just like the ones they want cancelled. If every group of employees claimed veto power over which governments or companies their employer can serve, no global business could function.

There is also a basic issue of consistency. No one is occupying Microsoft offices over contracts with China, Saudi Arabia, or other states with serious human rights problems. Singling out Israel reveals that this is not a principled stand on universal rights, but a political campaign against one country. Employees are free to hold those views privately, but staging a disruptive occupation of their workplace crosses a line. It undermines trust, damages productivity, and forces colleagues into political disputes they did not sign up for.

If workers want to change foreign policy, the proper place is the ballot box, not the office lobby.