Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has publicly rejected the 15-point Gaza framework proposed by the Board of Peace, yet recent developments suggest Israel’s actions align closely with many elements of the agreement.

Despite strong verbal opposition, Israeli military conduct over the past several days indicates a practical adherence to the framework’s terms. Since Monday evening, following instructions from Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir and political leadership, the IDF has halted targeted killings in Gaza and maintained a ceasefire. No such operations have been recorded since the directive was issued.

Additionally, the IDF’s deployment has largely remained along the pre-existing "Yellow Line," which defines roughly 53% of the Gaza Strip. Israeli forces have not advanced beyond this line, signaling a de facto ceasefire and a territorial stance consistent with the framework’s parameters.

However, the issue of Gaza’s reconstruction remains contentious. Israeli officials have made clear that reconstruction efforts will not proceed until Hamas is fully disarmed, emphasizing the need for comprehensive demilitarization before any rebuilding begins. This position contrasts with the Board of Peace’s viewpoint, which considers current activities in the Rafah area—located within the portion of Gaza under Israeli control—not as permanent reconstruction but as temporary infrastructural work necessary for initial humanitarian or logistical arrangements.

In effect, Israel continues to stress that full-scale reconstruction requires security guarantees and the elimination of militant capabilities. Meanwhile, on-the-ground work in Rafah appears to facilitate limited, temporary infrastructure projects, reflecting a nuanced approach rather than an outright halt to all rebuilding.

Overall, while official Israeli rhetoric rejects the Board of Peace’s framework, the state’s military and logistical practices suggest a more complex reality. Israel is, at least in practice, implementing critical parts of the ceasefire and territorial provisions outlined in the Gaza agreement, even as political leaders maintain a firm public stance against the framework.