Israel Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon on Monday made clear that he believes that any Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear program should be only be considered as a last resort, the latest signal that Israel is moving closer to the United States’ views on how to handle Iran.

Yaalon’s proclamation came during U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel’s visit to the Middle East this weekend, including his first visit to Israel since his conformation. Hagel traveled to the region in part to finalize an arms deal worth $10 billion, split between the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Speaking to reporters, Hagel said, “I don’t think there’s any question that [the deal is] another very clear signal to Iran.”

Yaalon agreed with the Obama administration’s policy that the “military option” remains on the table for confronting Iran, saying “one way or another Iran’s nuclear program will be stopped.” He also emphasized, however, the importance of such a move only coming should all others fail:

“We believe that the military option, which is well discussed, should be the last resort,” Israeli Defence Minister Moshe Yaalon told reporters at a news conference with Hagel.

“And there are other tools to be used and to be exhausted,” Yaalon said, listing diplomacy, economic sanctions and “moral support” for domestic opponents of Iran’s hardline Islamist leadership.

In a profile published at the time of his appointment, Reuters highlighted Yaalon’s preference for Israel to follow a cautious approach when determining how to handle Iran, a stance he appears to have brought with him into the Defense Ministry. Yaalon was also listed among the members of Netanyahu’s previous cabinet opposed to launching strikes on Iran in 2011, according to Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot.

Yaalon’s appointment as Defense Minister, given his previous positions on Iran, highlights the shift in Israeli rhetoric in recent months. Following Netanyahu’s so-called “Red Line” speech at the United Nations in October, the drumbeats for war have receded at least slightly. Israeli officials, particularly Netanyahu, have cooled their rhetoric due, in part it seems, to Iran’s continued conversion of its enriched uranium into a form harder to enrich further. But also, as his most recent trip to Israel showed, President Obama has largely succeeded in moving Netanyahu closer to his thinking on Iran since October. “I think there was a policy shift from Netanyahu,” CAP’s Matt Duss said on MSNBC last month, adding that “it’s Netanyahu really climbing down” to Obama’s position.

As Yaalon indicated, all options regarding Iran have yet to be exhausted. Iran on Monday announced it is seeking a new round of talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency over its nuclear program, tentatively scheduled to take place in May. A recent report from The Iran Project also emphasized that there is much the international community can still do to engage Iran diplomatically to end the stand-off over its nuclear program.

A new report released on Thursday by the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed that the growth of Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium has continued apace ahead of renewed negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.

Since the release of the last report by the IAEA’s Governor-General in November 2012, Iran has increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to a 20 percent level by about 43 kilograms. While Iran has restarted its conversion of some of that stockpile into uranium oxide gas and other forms that are difficult to further enrich to fuel medical research at the Tehran Research Reactor, the associated reduction didn’t counter new enrichment enough to show a decrease in overall levels.

The concern surrounding Iran’s uranium stockpile is not that it’s currently usable in a nuclear weapon — for that it would need to be enriched to 90 percent level, making it highly-enriched. However, the technology required to produce 90 percent enriched uranium is a small step from that required to reach the 20 percent threshold. Approximately 250 kilograms of 90 percent uranium is required to create one nuclear weapon, an amount that Iran has been careful not to reach.

Compounding misgivings about Iran’s nuclear program, however, is the news that its heavy-water reactor based in Arak is slated to become operational in early 2014. Unfortunately, the new reactor has the potential to produce plutonium as a by-product of its usage, which would only add to suspicions about the nature of Iran’s program. Plutonium can still be used in civilian reactors, but lower amounts are necessary to produce simpler — but lower-yield — nuclear weapons than those that utilize uranium. Israeli and U.S. intelligence agencies still believe, however, that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear weapon at this time.

Adding to the unfortunate news contained in the IAEA report, Iran today announced that it has begun installing more advanced centrifuges in its main enrichment facility Nanatz. The Iranian government had previously informed the IAEA of its plans to do so weeks ago, but started the actual work of getting the equipment into place today. However, today’s IAEA report does indicate that the exact same number of centrifuges remain operational at Natanz as in November, despite an increase in the number fully installed.

All of this heightens the pressure upon negotiators from the P5+1 — the United States, United Kingdom, China, France, Russian Federation, and Germany — ahead of their restarted talks with Iran next week in Kazakhstan. Reuters has reported that the group will present Iran with a new package of “substantial and serious” offers to Iran during the negotiations, including eased sanctions on gold and other precious metals.

Two physics experts say a document obtained by the Associated Press on Tuesday, which the news organization said “suggests” that Iran is “working on” a nuclear weapon, contains a “massive error” and might be a “hoax.” The AP’s publication of the document generated headlines on Tuesday because the graph, according to the AP, showed that Iran was running “computer simulations for a nuclear weapon that would produce more than triple the explosive force of the World War II bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.” But Yousaf Butt and Faronc Delnaki-Veress, writing in the Bulletin for Atomic Scientists, say that the massive error contained in the document is “unlikely to have been made by research scientists working at a national level.” To Butt and Dalnaki-Veress, the document “does nothing more than indicate either slipshod analysis or an amateurish hoax.”

In the AP article, titled “Graph suggests Iran working on bomb,” the news organization claims that the document was obtained from officials of “a country critical of Iran’s atomic program.” The AP also states that a “senior diplomat” confirmed that the International Atomic Energy Agency “cited” the diagram in a report from last year. Butt and Delnaki Veress, however, say the graph contains key errors and that “the level of scientific sophistication needed to produce such a graph corresponds to that typically found in graduate or advanced undergraduate-level nuclear physics courses.” If the IAEA did indeed use the graph, it couldn’t have revealed much because, according to Butt and Delnaki-Veress, “the image does not imply that computer simulations were actually run” and the graph’s findings are “neither a secret, nor indicative of a nuclear weapons program.”

“The diagram leaked to the Associated Press this week is nothing more than either shoddy sources or shoddy science. In either case, the world can keep calm and carry on,” the Bulletin article summarizes.

Glenn Greenwald, a columnist at the Guardian, points out that similar documents were brandished in the early 2000s:

“The case for the attack on Iraq was driven, of course, by a mountain of fabricated documents and deliberately manipulated intelligence which western media outlets uncritically amplified.”

When it comes to the nuclear issue in Iran, the Obama administration continues to pursue a diplomatic solution, which they believe is the “the best and most permanent” way to end the stand-off. Indeed, former Israeli officials have said that a strike on Iran could potentially accelerate Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon. The U.S. finds a nuclear armed Iran to be unacceptable, but the window for diplomacy remains open as U.S. and Israel intelligence believe that Iran has not decided to build a nuclear weapon.

Today, however, the head of the IAEA, Yukiya Amano, said that he could not confirm that Iran’s nuclear work was peaceful with “credible assurance.” And Reuters reports today that “the United States effectively set a March deadline…for Iran to start cooperating in substance with a U.N. nuclear agency investigation, saying it would otherwise urge reporting the issue to the U.N. Security Council.”

A new report released on Friday by the International Atomic Energy Agency declares that while Iran’s nuclear program has moved forward, the motion is incremental in nature. The report comes as speculation continues to grow about whether the U.S. and Iran will engage in direct talks.

While the number of centrifuges installed at the Fordow nuclear site, buried into the side of a mountain, has increased, the number that are operational has stayed the same. Likewise, the amount of uranium that has been enriched to a 20 percent level has actually decreased since the August 2012 report. This is due to a large amount of material being converted, or slated for conversion, to be used in reactor fuel plates. While not impossible to transform this material back into uranium for further enrichment, it greatly complicates the process.

In terms of the nature of Iran’s program, the full report notes that since August there has no new ability of the IAEA to completely verify Iran’s work due to there being “no agreement on a structured approach to resolving outstanding issues related to possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme and no agreement by Iran to the Agency’s request for access to the Parchin site.”

Iran experts, like Jamal Abdi, the policy director at the National Iranian American Council, say the report offers “no surprises” and that it’s clear that Iran is continuing “to modestly increase its bargaining position but hasn’t made any dramatic escalatory moves like installing advanced machines or enriching above medium grade.” Abdi told ThinkProgress that the “same number of centrifuges are spinning at Fordow, and Iran’s medium enriched uranium quantities are still well below the amount required for a weapon.” Others, like Mark Fitzpatrick, the director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program, come to a similar conclusion. Fitzpatrick tweeted that the report “shows Iran continues to make incremental advances, but almost as if calibrating progress so as not to spark a crisis.” He also tweeted that the report shows that Iran “has 10% more enriched uranium and 10% more centrifuges than 3 months ago. The rial dropped 40%, so this time sanctions are winning.”

To some, like Cliff Kupchan, an Iran analyst at the Eurasia Group, the report indicates that, “Iran has crafted its nuclear posture to gain leverage at likely upcoming talks.” Kupchan said to ThinkProgress that “Iran could quickly increase production of dangerous medium enriched uranium -– but has for now chosen not to.” He added that “in effect, Iran has pointed a loaded diplomatic gun at the West, hoping that it will see the most attractive offer possible from the U.S. and its partners.”

The Obama administration has enforced sanctions against Iran with the goal of inducing a diplomatic solution. Thus far, sanctions have had an impact: Iran has lost $48 billion in oil reserves because of them. What’s more, last month the Congressional Research Service reported that, “many judge that Iran might soon decide it needs a nuclear compromise to produce an easing of sanctions.” Indeed, influential Iranian officials have recently said that diplomacy with the U.S. is not “taboo.” Officials from the U.S. and Israel believe Iran has not yet decided on whether to build a nuclear weapon.

The International Atomic Energy Agency released a report on Iran’s nuclear activities today which finds that the Islamic Republic doubled its capacity to produce enriched uranium at the Fordo nuclear facility buried deep underground. However, less than half of those centrifuges are in operation.

The IAEA also said that Iranian authorities continue a pattern of non-cooperation on its nuclear program and thus, the report states, “the Agency is unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, and therefore to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.”

The IAEA also expressed concern about Iran’s Parchin site, reporting that after the IAEA notified Iran that it suspected nuclear weapons related activity there, satellite imagery showed “extensive activities”:

Satellite imagery available to the Agency for the period from February 2005 to January 2012 shows virtually no activity at or near the building housing the [large explosives containment vessel in which to conduct hydrodynamic experiments]. However, since the Agency’s first request for access to this location, satellite imagery shows that extensive activities and resultant changes have taken place at this location. [...]

In light of these extensive activities, the Agency’s ability to verify the information on which its concerns are based has been adversely affected and, when the Agency gains access to the location, its ability to conduct effective verification will have been significantly hampered.

The Institute for Science and International Security has said that it suspects the Iranians have been engaged in an extensive clean up operation at Parchin.

The U.N. announced yesterday a special Task Force to investigate Iran’s nuclear program.

With negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program moving to Moscow next week, a draft letter to be circulated among Senators for signature calls on the Obama administration to not offer Iran major concessions without a comprehensive deal on its nuclear program. The draft letter, obtained by ThinkProgress, says that, should the Iranians not take certain steps demanded by the Senators, the U.S. should “reevaluate the utility of further talks.”

Authored by Sens. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Roy Blunt (R-MO), the draft letter outlines the “absolute minimum steps” Iran must take in Moscow: shutting down its Fordow enrichment facility, ending enrichment of uranium to high levels, and shipping out its stockpile of high-enriched uranium. The letter says that Iran’s agreement to these steps would “justify continued discussions,” but doesn’t outline any other possible concessions.

While that leaves the door open for other possible lesser concessions, the Senators rule out acceding to a key Iranian goal until Iran agrees to the full spectrum of Western and U.N. demands. The New York Times reported that, in Baghdad, Iran asked for “an easing of the onerous economic sanctions imposed by the West,” something the Iranians have “relentlessly” pursued. But the Senators refuse to consider such steps without a comprehensive deal. In the draft letter, they write:

Barring full, verifiable Iranian compliance with all Security Council resolutions and full cooperation with the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], including a new, far more intrusive inspections regime under the additional protocol, we see no circumstances under which Iran should be relieved from the current sanctions or those scheduled to come into effect at the end of this month.

That restriction could, in effect, stymie moves toward a “confidence-building” deal. A deal identical to the one mentioned by the Senators — demanding the “absolute minimum steps” but offering little sanctions relief — was on the table in Baghdad. After it failed to advance, an Iranian diplomat told the Christian Science Monitor that Iran would not “accept these things this way.”

Read more