Cisco Political Audit

1. Executive Summary

1.1 Audit Mandate and Scope

This specialized governance audit was commissioned to evaluate the political and ideological footprint of Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”) with a specific focus on its complicity in systems of occupation, apartheid, surveillance, and militarization regarding the State of Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). The objective of this report is to rigorously document and evidence the extent to which Cisco’s leadership, ownership structure, and operational activities materially or ideologically support the Israeli military apparatus and the illegal settlement enterprise.

The audit utilizes a multi-dimensional risk assessment framework, screening for:

1. Governance Ideology: Alignment of the Board of Directors and Executive Leadership Team (ELT) with Zionist advocacy groups and state-sponsored initiatives.
2. Operational Complicity: Direct material support for the Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMOD), including critical infrastructure for command-and-control systems.
3. Lobbying and Trade: Financial and reputational contributions to pro-Israel lobbying entities and “Brand Israel” normalization campaigns.
4. The “Safe Harbor” Consistency Test: A forensic comparison of Cisco’s geopolitical response to the Russia-Ukraine conflict versus the Israel-Gaza conflict.
5. Internal Human Rights Governance: The application of internal policies regarding employee dissent and solidarity with Palestine.

1.2 Summary of Key Findings

The investigation has uncovered a systemic pattern of deep integration between Cisco Systems and the Israeli state security apparatus. Unlike a standard commercial relationship defined by transactional vendor neutrality, Cisco’s engagement is characterized by active strategic partnership, ideological alignment at the executive level, and direct participation in the maintenance of illegal settlements.

Critical Red Flags Identified:

• Architectural Complicity in Warfare: Cisco is a primary architect of the Israeli military’s digital transformation. The company won the tender to supply the server infrastructure for “David’s Citadel,” the IDF’s underground data center in the Naqab, which centralizes command, control, and intelligence functions.¹
• Settlement Entrenchment: The company has partnered with the Israeli government to establish and subsidize “Tech Hubs” within illegal settlements in the West Bank (e.g., Modi’in Illit, Kiryat Arba) and the Occupied Golan Heights, directly contravening the Fourth Geneva Convention.²
• The “Safe Harbor” Failure: A forensic analysis reveals a catastrophic failure of ethical consistency. While Cisco destroyed approximately $23 million in assets to ensure a “clean break” from Russia in 2022, it expedited supply chains and developed the “Israel Rises” support platform for the IDF during the 2023-2024 bombardment of Gaza.²
• Governance Ideology: CEO Chuck Robbins and other executives have engaged with the Jewish National Fund (JNF), an organization central to land expropriation policies, and have publicly aligned the company with Israeli state objectives during active conflict.⁸
• Suppression of Dissent: The audit documents a discriminatory application of internal conduct policies. While pro-Israel advocacy is institutionalized, employees organizing under the banner “Bridge to Humanity” (B2H) to protest complicity in genocide faced censorship, harassment, and termination.¹⁰

1.3 Audit Verdict and Ranking

Based on the evidence presented in this report, Cisco Systems is ranked as a Tier 1 – Systemic/Strategic Partner. This classification is reserved for entities whose leadership, ownership, or operations provide mission-critical infrastructure, material support during active conflict, and ideological cover for state policies of apartheid and occupation. Cisco is not merely a vendor; it is a structural component of the Israeli military-industrial complex.

2. Governance Ideology: The Board and Executive Leadership

A corporation’s political footprint is often determined by the ideological commitments of its leadership. This section audits the Board of Directors and Executive Leadership Team (ELT) for affiliations with advocacy groups such as the Jewish National Fund (JNF), AIPAC, or the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI), and assesses whether the “tone at the top” supports political neutrality or ideological partisanship.

2.1 The Executive Leadership Team: Ideological Alignment

The audit finds that the executive leadership of Cisco, led by Chair and CEO Chuck Robbins, has moved beyond standard corporate diplomacy to position the company as an ideological ally of the State of Israel.

Chuck Robbins (Chair and CEO):

Mr. Robbins’ public conduct and strategic decisions reflect a deep commitment to the Israeli state narrative. Following the events of October 7, 2023, Robbins issued internal and external communications that starkly deviated from neutrality. While most corporations issued vague calls for peace, Robbins explicitly stated that Cisco teams were “working day and night to ship our technology to Israel” and to apply cybersecurity capabilities “at the request of the country”.5

This statement is critical evidence of political complicity. By fulfilling requests “of the country” during an active military campaign widely accused of war crimes, Robbins positioned Cisco as a logistical partner to the belligerent state. Furthermore, Robbins’ engagement with the Jewish National Fund (JNF)—an organization historically and legally implicated in the expropriation of Palestinian land—is significant. Evidence confirms that Robbins, alongside Israeli President Reuven Rivlin, inaugurated Digital Hubs, cementing a state-corporate partnership.⁸ The partnership with the JNF on the “NetGev” project highlights a strategic alignment with state efforts to “Judaize” the Negev/Naqab region, often at the expense of Bedouin communities.⁹

The “Revolving Door” of Military Intelligence:

The ideological footprint of the leadership is further reinforced by the integration of former Israeli military intelligence officers into Cisco’s senior executive ranks. This “revolving door” ensures that the strategic priorities of the Israeli defense establishment are represented within Cisco’s decision-making structures.

• Eyal Dagan (EVP, Strategic Projects): A co-founder of Leaba Semiconductor (acquired by Cisco), Dagan is a former high-ranking officer in the Israeli military. He now reports directly to the CEO, placing a veteran of the Israeli security state in the inner sanctum of Cisco’s global strategy.¹²
• Haim Pinto (VP of Technology): Pinto has been explicitly quoted celebrating the seamless integration between Cisco and the military. He described the “connection between the technology units in the Israeli military and the high-tech companies” as a “significant anchor,” noting that the sight of uniformed officers working alongside Cisco engineers is “very natural to us”.³ This statement is an admission that, at the operational leadership level, the distinction between Cisco as a civilian entity and the IDF as a military entity has eroded.
• Zika Abzuk (Senior Executive): Identified as a supporter of J Street, but notably integrated into the Israeli high-tech advocacy ecosystem.¹⁴

2.2 Board of Directors Screen

The Board of Directors is the ultimate governance authority. An analysis of the board members reveals connections to the defense industry and surveillance sectors that align with Cisco’s militarized footprint in Israel.

Michael D. Capellas (Lead Independent Director):

Mr. Capellas serves as the Lead Independent Director, a role with significant influence over governance and ethics. Crucially, audit findings reveal that Capellas simultaneously serves on the Board of Directors of Cellebrite, an Israeli digital intelligence company.15 Cellebrite is notorious globally for providing phone-hacking and forensic surveillance technology to repressive regimes and police forces.

• Implication: Capellas’s dual role creates a governance bridge between Cisco’s networking capabilities and the aggressive surveillance industry. It suggests a comfort level at the highest governance tier with technologies used for state repression and surveillance, undermining any internal claims to human rights advocacy.

Wesley G. Bush (Independent Director):

Mr. Bush, a director since 2019, is the former Chairman and CEO of Northrop Grumman, one of the world’s largest weapons manufacturers and a major supplier to the Israeli military.16

• Implication: Bush’s background in the defense industrial base aligns with Cisco’s increasing entrenchment in military contracting. His experience at the helm of a defense giant likely facilitates Cisco’s strategic maneuvering in securing Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contracts, such as the massive server tender for the Israeli Ministry of Defense.

Board-Level Affiliations with Advocacy Groups:

While direct membership lists for groups like AIPAC are often private, the audit identified indirect connections. For instance, former Michigan Governor and current US Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, who previously served on boards, had interactions with AIPAC, highlighting the pervasive nature of this lobby in the circles from which Cisco draws its directors.18 More directly, the political donations authorized by the Board-governed PACs (detailed in Section 5) consistently favor AIPAC-backed candidates, reflecting a board-sanctioned policy of political support for Israel.

2.3 Ideological Governance Conclusion

The governance ideology of Cisco is not neutral. It is characterized by:

1. Direct Executive Alignment: A CEO who publicly pledges logistical support to the Israeli state during war.
2. Structural Integration: The absorption of Israeli military intelligence commanders into executive roles (Dagan, Pinto).
3. Defense Industry Synergy: A Board composition (Capellas, Bush) that links Cisco to the broader military-industrial and surveillance complex.
4. Institutional Partnership: Formal collaboration with state-building Zionist organizations like the JNF.

3. Operational Complicity: The Military-Industrial Nexus

Cisco’s operational footprint in Israel provides the most definitive evidence of political complicity. The company does not simply sell “off-the-shelf” technology; it provides the “nervous system” for the Israeli occupation, facilitating control, surveillance, and military coordination through bespoke infrastructure projects.

3.1 “David’s Citadel” and the Backbone of the IDF

In modern network-centric warfare, the server and the network are weapons of war. They process the intelligence, distribute the targeting data, and enable the command and control of lethal force.

The Contract:

In 2017, Cisco won a critical tender, valued at over $250 million, to replace Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) as the sole provider of servers for the Israeli military and other security forces.1 This was not a standard commercial transaction; it was a strategic infrastructure project paid for largely by U.S. Foreign Military Financing (FMF), meaning American tax dollars were funneled through the Pentagon to Cisco to build Israeli military capacity.

The Infrastructure:

This contract facilitated the construction of David’s Citadel, the IDF’s largest underground data center located in the Naqab (Negev) desert.

• Function: The facility integrates the military’s “most operational” systems, including hundreds of combat, intelligence, and C4I (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence) systems.¹
• Complicity: By building and maintaining this data center, Cisco is directly responsible for the hardware availability and processing power used by the IDF. In the context of the 2023-2024 Gaza war, this data center likely hosts the AI-driven targeting systems—such as “The Gospel” and “Lavender”—which have been used to generate kill lists at an industrial scale, resulting in massive civilian casualties.¹ Without the server capacity provided by Cisco, the latency and processing speed required for these AI target-generation systems would be compromised.

Continued Procurement During Genocide:

While reports suggested Dell might replace Cisco in subsequent tenders, the audit reveals that the Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMOD) continued to procure Cisco servers during the height of the Gaza genocide. Between November 2023 and January 2024 alone, the IMOD purchased Cisco servers worth nearly $2 million via unclassified contracts.1 This indicates that specific Cisco architectures remain mission-critical for the IDF’s war efforts, and Cisco continued to fulfill these orders despite the International Court of Justice’s ruling on plausible genocide.

3.2 Unified Communications and “Smart City” Surveillance

Beyond the data center, Cisco provides the interface through which the occupation is managed.

Unified Communications for the Military:

Since 2020, Cisco has been deploying its “Unified Communications System” across the Israeli military. This IP-based system integrates voice, video, data, and mobility applications, allowing seamless communication between different military units.2

• Operational Impact: This technology accelerates the “sensor-to-shooter” cycle. By enabling real-time video and data sharing between intelligence units (e.g., Unit 8200) and combat units in Gaza or the West Bank, Cisco’s technology directly enhances the lethality and efficiency of military operations.

Jerusalem “Smart City” – The Surveillance Grid:

In 2017, Cisco partnered with the Jerusalem Municipality for a “Smart City” project.1 In the context of Occupied East Jerusalem, “Smart City” is a euphemism for “Panopticon.”

• The Technology: The project involved the installation of Cisco communication equipment and CCTV cameras throughout the city.
• The Application: This infrastructure feeds into the “Mabat 2000” surveillance center, used by the Israeli police to track Palestinian residents, restrict movement, and suppress protests. By digitizing the infrastructure of East Jerusalem, Cisco aids in the enforcement of what major human rights organizations (Amnesty, HRW, B’Tselem) define as an apartheid system.

3.3 The Acquisition Pipeline: Privatizing Unit 8200

Cisco’s strategy involves acquiring Israeli startups that are essentially commercial spin-offs of the Israeli military intelligence sector. This serves to capitalize the Israeli defense ecosystem and integrate military-grade tech into Cisco’s global portfolio.

Key Acquisitions and Military Links:

Table 3.1: Cisco’s Acquisition Pipeline of Israeli Defense-Tech.³

The acquisition of Robust Intelligence in September 2024 is particularly egregious.³ The founder, a former special operations combat officer, publicly linked the company’s recruitment strategy to the Israeli talent pool during the ongoing conflict. Furthermore, Cisco’s investment in Team8, a venture foundry explicitly designed to commercialize Unit 8200 technology, demonstrates a proactive capitalization of the Israeli military apparatus.¹⁹

4. The Settlement Enterprise: Digital Colonialism

International law, specifically the Fourth Geneva Convention, prohibits an occupying power from transferring its civilian population into occupied territory. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) affirmed in July 2024 that Israel’s presence in the OPT is unlawful and that settlements constitute a violation of international law. Cisco’s operations in these settlements are not passive; they are constitutive of the illegal settlement enterprise.

4.1 The “Tech Hubs” Network

Cisco, in partnership with the Israeli Ministry for the Development of the Negev and the Galilee, launched a project to build 100 “Tech Hubs” to bring high-tech employment to the “periphery.” The audit confirms that Cisco defines “periphery” to include illegal settlements on stolen Palestinian land.

Verified Locations in Occupied Territory:

According to the research snippets 2, Cisco established hubs in at least seven illegal locations:

1. Modi’in Illit: An ultra-Orthodox settlement built on the lands of the Palestinian villages of Ni’lin and Kharbatha.
2. Beitar Illit: A massive settlement block west of Bethlehem.
3. Kiryat Arba: A radical settlement near Hebron, notorious for extremist violence against Palestinians.
4. Itamar: Deep inside the West Bank, often a flashpoint for settler-initiated violence.
5. Sha’ar Binyamin: An industrial zone that serves the economic needs of the settlement bloc.
6. Katzrin: Located in the Occupied Syrian Golan Heights.
7. Ha’Emir Junction: Located in the Occupied Syrian Golan Heights.

4.2 Economic Normalization of Apartheid

The establishment of these hubs is a form of economic sustenance for the settlements.

• Attracting Settlers: By providing high-tech workspaces and Cisco connectivity, these hubs remove a barrier to entry for living in settlements: the commute to Tel Aviv. They allow settlers to work in the high-tech sector while living on occupied land, thereby “attracting and retaining” the settler population.³
• Subsidized Illegality: These are government-subsidized spaces using Cisco hardware. Cisco is effectively subsidizing the economic viability of war crimes. This goes beyond “doing business”; it is active participation in the colonization of the West Bank.

4.3 Partnership with the Jewish National Fund (JNF)

The JNF is a “National Institution” in Israel with a specific mandate to hold land for the “Jewish people” in perpetuity, legally barring lease or sale to non-Jews (i.e., Palestinians).

• The Partnership: Cisco partnered with the JNF to launch the NetGev Hi-Tech Hub initiative.⁹ This initiative focuses on the Negev/Naqab region.
• The Context: The development of the Negev is often framed by the Israeli state as “making the desert bloom,” but in practice, it involves the displacement of unrecognized Bedouin villages. By partnering with the JNF on this specific project, Cisco aligns its brand with the state’s demographic engineering projects. The “NetGev” project is described as a way to “retrain the south’s existing population” and “attract new residents,” euphemisms for the Judaization of the Bedouin heartland.

5. The “Safe Harbor” Stress Test: Ukraine vs. Gaza

A robust political risk audit must determine if a company applies its ethical standards consistently. The “Safe Harbor” test compares the corporate response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022) with the response to the Israeli bombardment of Gaza (2023-2024). The discrepancy found is absolute and indicates a discriminatory application of human rights policy.

5.1 The Russia Precedent: The “Clean Break”

When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Cisco’s response was swift, decisive, and financially painful for the company.

• Total Exit: Cisco announced it would stop all business operations in Russia and Belarus.⁶
• Asset Destruction: To ensure that its technology could not be used by the Russian state or military, Cisco physically destroyed its own inventory and spare parts in Russia. Reports indicate the company destroyed assets worth approximately 1.86 billion rubles (approx. $23 million).⁷ This included IT equipment, furniture, and vehicles.
• Sanctions Plus: Cisco went beyond basic compliance, engaging in an “orderly wind-down” that severed ties with all partners and distributors to prevent “grey market” imports.⁶
• Humanitarian Stance: The company explicitly condemned the invasion and mobilized resources to support Ukrainian sovereignty.

5.2 The Israel Reality: The “Active Support”

In stark contrast, following the onset of the war on Gaza—which the ICJ ruled was plausibly genocidal—Cisco deepened its engagement.

• Entrenchment: Instead of pausing operations, CEO Chuck Robbins declared that Cisco was “working day and night to ship our technology to Israel”.⁵
• Material Support for the War Effort: Cisco Israel developed the “Israel Rises” platform for the IDF Home Front Command. This digital platform facilitates cross-sector joint action to support the war effort.² This is direct software development for a military branch during active combat.
• Employee Grants: Cisco provided special grants to employees who were called up for reserve duty in the Israeli military.² While supporting employees is standard, financially incentivizing participation in a specific military campaign creates a direct link between corporate treasury and military manpower.
• Refusal to Divest: Despite the ICJ rulings and the clear potential for its technology to be used in war crimes (e.g., in the David’s Citadel data center), Cisco refused to suspend contracts or pause shipments.

5.3 Analysis of the Double Standard

The comparison demonstrates that Cisco’s “ethics” are geopolitical, not universal.

• Russia: Cisco accepts financial loss ($23M in destroyed assets) to avoid complicity in aggression.
• Israel: Cisco pursues financial gain and operational continuity, even facilitating the logistics of the war.
  This double standard exposes the company to severe reputational risk and accusations of hypocrisy in its Human Rights Policy.

Table 5.1: The Safe Harbor Discrepancy.²

6. Internal Policy: The “Neutrality” Myth and Labor Rights

A company’s external politics often mirror its internal culture. The audit investigated reports of disciplinary actions regarding Palestine solidarity to determine if Cisco enforces a “Neutrality” policy or an ideological bias.

6.1 The “Bridge to Humanity” (B2H) Case

Following October 7, a group of employees formed “Bridge to Humanity” (B2H) to advocate for Palestinian rights, question the company’s military contracts, and demand humanitarian support for Gaza comparable to that given to Israel.

• The Organizing: B2H drafted an “Open Letter” signed by over 1,700 employees.¹⁰ The letter demanded an end to complicity in genocide and pay parity for Palestinian workers.
• The Suppression: Cisco management reacted aggressively. The audit finds that Cisco:
  • Shut down the B2H internal SharePoint website.
  • Advised affinity group leaders that they could file disciplinary complaints against the organizers of the letter.¹⁰
  • Failed to protect signatories from harassment. When a list of signatories was leaked and posted on the “Connected Jewish Network” (CJN) with calls for them to “quit living,” Cisco security failed to conduct a forensic investigation or take decisive action against the harassers.¹⁰

6.2 Discriminatory Disciplinary Actions

The most alarming finding is the termination of employees associated with B2H.

• The Firings: Legal complaints filed against Cisco allege that the company terminated “at least four high-performing employees who were actively and visibly involved with B2H’s protected concerted activity”.¹⁰ Cisco characterized these as cost-saving measures, but the timing and the specific targeting of vocal organizers suggest retaliation.
• The “All Lives Matter” Contrast: The bias is evident when compared to Cisco’s past actions. In 2020, following the murder of George Floyd, Cisco famously fired employees for posting “All Lives Matter” or criticizing the BLM movement on internal forums, citing a zero-tolerance policy for insensitivity.¹⁰
• The Double Standard: In 2024, when employees on the CJN forum “glorified violence” and “joked about sending people to their deaths” in Gaza, Cisco declined to take broad accountability measures, stating it would only take down “some” comments.¹⁰

Conclusion: Cisco’s internal policy is not neutral. It actively polices and punishes advocacy for Palestinian rights while tolerating, and even structurally supporting (via executive statements), pro-Israel advocacy. This creates a hostile work environment for Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim employees.

7. Lobbying, Trade, and “Brand Israel”

Cisco invests significant capital in maintaining the political cover for its operations. This involves direct political contributions and the sponsorship of “Brand Israel” events that normalize the state’s tech-militarism.

7.1 Political Action Committee (PAC) Activity

Cisco’s Federal PAC (Political Action Committee) directs funds to US lawmakers who are instrumental in maintaining the flow of military aid to Israel. This is a crucial feedback loop: Cisco funds the politicians -> Politicians approve FMF (Foreign Military Financing) to Israel -> Israel uses FMF to buy Cisco servers.

Key 2024 Election Cycle Contributions:

The audit analyzed Federal Election Commission (FEC) data and other sources regarding Cisco’s PAC activity 23:

• Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY): Received $2,000. Lawler is a primary beneficiary of AIPAC and a vocal proponent of unconditional military support for Israel.
• Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY): Received $2,500. Torres is widely recognized as one of the most staunchly pro-Israel Democrats in Congress.
• Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ): Received between $1,000 and $2,500. A key ally of AIPAC within the Democratic party.
• Institutional GOP Support: Cisco’s PAC donated $15,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and $5,000 to the “Tuesday Group PAC”.²³ These bodies fund the broader caucus, including leadership figures like Elise Stefanik and Steve Scalise, who have led legislative efforts to suppress pro-Palestine activism on campuses and in workplaces.

By funding these specific candidates, Cisco is financing the political infrastructure that shields Israel from diplomatic censure and ensures the continuity of military contracts.

7.2 “Brand Israel” and Trade Sponsorship

Cisco plays a lead role in the “Brand Israel” campaign, which seeks to rebrand the country as a “Startup Nation” to distract from the reality of military occupation.

• Cybertech Global Tel Aviv: Cisco is a top-tier partner/sponsor of this major conference.²⁷ Cybertech is not a neutral trade show; it is a nexus of the Israeli military, intelligence agencies, and the global surveillance industry. Speakers often include the Prime Minister and heads of the Mossad and Shin Bet. By sponsoring this, Cisco normalizes the integration of cyber-warfare into civilian commerce.
• Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI): In the United Kingdom, Cisco has been documented sponsoring events for the Conservative Friends of Israel, including providing travel and accommodation for British MPs.²⁹ This is direct corporate lobbying to influence British foreign policy in favor of Israel.
• British-Israel Chamber of Commerce: While direct membership lists are opaque, the sponsorship of CFI and the deep involvement in bilateral trade initiatives strongly suggest alignment with the Chamber’s objectives of boosting UK-Israel trade in defense and tech.³¹

8. Conclusion and Verdict

8.1 Synthesis of Complicity

This audit concludes that Cisco Systems, Inc. operates as a strategic partner to the State of Israel, deeply complicit in its military operations and settlement enterprise. The evidence is not circumstantial; it is structural and material.

1. Material Complicity: Cisco built the backbone of the IDF’s command-and-control network (David’s Citadel) and continues to supply servers during active genocide.
2. Territorial Complicity: Cisco maintains a physical footprint in illegal settlements (Tech Hubs), engaging in what international law defines as the pillage and colonization of occupied territory.
3. Ideological Complicity: The Executive Leadership Team, led by Chuck Robbins, has publicly aligned the company with the Israeli state narrative, partnered with the JNF, and integrated military intelligence commanders into the corporate hierarchy.
4. Political Complicity: Through PAC contributions and lobbying sponsorships (CFI), Cisco funds the political machinery that sustains the occupation.

8.2 Final Ranking

Audit Ranking: TIER 1 – SYSTEMIC/STRATEGIC PARTNER

Definition: The entity provides mission-critical infrastructure, material support during active conflict, and ideological cover for state policies. The entity is integrated into the military-industrial chain of the state in question.

Score Justification:

• Governance Ideology: CRITICAL RISK. (CEO alignment, JNF partnership, Board ties to defense).
• Lobbying & Trade: HIGH RISK. (Funding AIPAC candidates, sponsoring CFI).
• Safe Harbor: FAILED. (Clear double standard vs. Russia).
• Internal Policy: FAILED. (Discriminatory firing of B2H members).

Recommendations:

For stakeholders concerned with Political Risk, Human Rights, and International Law, Cisco Systems presents an unmitigated risk profile. The company is actively aiding and abetting violations of the Geneva Conventions and recent ICJ rulings. Immediate divestment and exclusion from ethical procurement lists are the only consistent responses to the findings of this audit.

End of Report

Works cited

1. Cisco Systems Inc | AFSC Investigate, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://investigate.info/company/cisco-systems
2. The Israeli Occupation Industry – Cisco Systems – Who Profits, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.whoprofits.org/companies/company/6529?cisco-systems
3. CISCO | BDS Movement, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://bdsmovement.net/cisco
4. Cisco Company Complicity Profile UPDATED 2/13/2025 – BDS Movement, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.bdsmovement.net/sites/default/files/2025-02/Cisco%20Company%20Complicity%20Profile%20UPDATED%202_13_2025.pdf
5. My labor will not contribute to Genocide and Apartheid of … – Medium, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://medium.com/@bridge2humanity/my-labor-will-not-contribute-to-genocide-and-apartheid-of-palestinians-cisco-resignation-letter-d9d79b5fea5c
6. Cisco ended operations in Russia, but its gear allegedly being shipped through China & other countries; incl. co. comments – Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/cisco-ended-operations-in-russia-but-its-gear-allegedly-being-shipped-through-china-other-countries-incl-co-comments/
7. #LeaveRussia: Cisco is Exiting the Russian Market, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://leave-russia.org/cisco
8. Cisco Expands Network of Digital Hubs Connecting Communities and Businesses in Israel, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://newsroom.cisco.com/c/r/newsroom/en/us/a/y2018/m03/cisco-expands-network-of-digital-hubs-connecting-communities-and-businesses-in-israel.html
9. Makor-Making Dreams into Reality in Arad – JNF.org, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.jnf.org/jnf-blog/jnf-wire/jnf-wire-stories/makor-making-dreams-into-reality-in-arad
10. out against those comments. – Legal Aid at Work, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://legalaidatwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Cisco_complaints-redacted.pdf
11. On JNF Makor Mission, the thrill of seeing Israel’s desert come alive, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.jnf.org/jnf-blog/post/blog/on-jnf-makor-mission-the-thrill-of-seeing-israels-desert-come-alive
12. Cisco Systems Israel Ltd. – IVC Data & Insights, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.ivc-online.com/Google-Card?id=DA95093E-207A-E111-AC59-00155D32A403&type=1
13. Cisco Fact Sheet – BDS Movement, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://bdsmovement.net/sites/default/files/Cisco_Fact_Sheet.pdf
14. Israeli supporters – J Street, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://jstreet.org/about-us/our-supporters/israeli-supporters/
15. Cellebrite Strengthens Leadership: Tech Veteran Michael Capellas Joins Board, Hogan Named Interim CEO | CLBT Stock News, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.stocktitan.net/news/CLBT/cellebrite-appoints-michael-d-capellas-to-board-of-directors-as-lead-d42runjaxlxt.html
16. Corporate Governance – Board of Directors – Cisco – Investor Relations, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://investor.cisco.com/corporate-governance/board-of-directors/default.aspx
17. Wesley G. Bush – Wikipedia, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_G._Bush
18. Jennifer Granholm – Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report (OGE Form 278e), accessed on December 12, 2025, https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presiden.nsf/PAS+Index/ADEFA0D29965A0498525866100317E6F/$FILE/Granholm,%20Jennifer%20M.%20%20final278.pdf
19. UCL, Cisco & Complicity in Israeli Apartheid, Occupation & Genocide Cisco and Israel – BDS@UCL, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://bdsatucl.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/cisco_final.pdf
20. CISCO’S INVOLVMENT IN THE ISRAELI OCCUPATION – Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://media.business-humanrights.org/media/documents/files/documents/CISCOfinal-web.pdf
21. How Cisco turns a blind eye to the presence of “grey” products in Russia | Ukrainska Pravda, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/columns/2022/08/05/7362008/
22. Letter from a Concerned Cisconian | by Bridge to Humanity (B2H) – Medium, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://medium.com/@bridge2humanity/letter-from-a-concerned-cisconian-86d1fd0ee103
23. LD-203 Contribution Report, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/contribution/a39204da-5690-44ee-aa73-6a34d1a0c259/print/
24. 2024 Citi Political Engagement Report, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.citigroup.com/rcs/citigpa/storage/public/political-engagement-report-2024.pdf
25. 2024 Cycle Political Contributions – DeltaPAC, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://s2.q4cdn.com/181345880/files/doc_downloads/2025/05/2024-Cycle-Political-Giving-2024.pdf
26. L3Harris-2024-cycle-contributions.pdf, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.l3harris.com/sites/default/files/2025-03/L3Harris-2024-cycle-contributions.pdf
27. Sponsor logos | Cybertech Global Tel Aviv, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.cybertechisrael.com/partners
28. ‘Middle East 2.0’: Cybertech Global Tel Aviv 2024 – JNS.org, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.jns.org/middle-east-2-0-cybertech-global-tel-aviv-2024/
29. Changes to the Register of Members’ Interests The Register of Members’ Interests, 21 May 2004 – TheyWorkForYou, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://www.theyworkforyou.com/regmem/?d=2004-05-21
30. Israel – Hansard – UK Parliament, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2008-05-20/debates/08052034000001/Israel
31. UCL Power Analysis, accessed on December 12, 2025, https://bdsatucl.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/UCL-Power-Analysis-2024.pdf