BAGHDAD — The U.S.-Iraqi security pact now before parliament calls for U.S. forces to leave Iraq's cities by June 30 in recognition of an improved security climate, but the deadline poses a key test for Iraqi forces in places like Baghdad and the northern city of Mosul where attacks still occur daily.

It is a gamble Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, emboldened by recent military successes, is willing to take — partly because of growing confidence in the capabilities of Iraqi forces.

U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker described the security gains as "superlative" at a Monday signing ceremony of the agreement with Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari.

The pact, overwhelmingly approved by the Cabinet, was read to lawmakers in the first stage of parliament's procedure for approving the bill.

A vote on the pact, which allows U.S. forces to remain in Iraq through 2011, is scheduled for Nov. 24. It has a good chance of passing since al-Maliki's Cabinet is made up of the same parties that dominate the 275-seat legislature.

If approved, it goes to President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, and his two deputies for ratification.

Talabani and Adel Abdul-Mahdi, his Shiite vice president, support the deal. The second deputy, Sunni Arab Tariq al-Hashemi, said he wanted it put to a vote in a national referendum. He is unlikely to veto it if his longtime demands for more political clout for the Sunni Arab minority are met.

Under the agreement, U.S. forces also must grant Iraqi authorities extensive power over the operations and movements of American forces. The deal would replace a U.N. mandate governing their presence in Iraq that expires Dec. 31.

White House press secretary Dana Perino defended the deal even though it includes a timeline for U.S. troop withdrawals — a point President George W. Bush had long opposed as a sign of defeat in the war that began in 2003.

"We just keep getting success after success on the security front in Iraq," Perino said. "And when you work with a partner on a negotiation, you have to concede some points."

Adm. Mike Mullen told a Pentagon news conference he consulted the top U.S. commanders in Iraq and they all believe the agreement allows enough time for the Iraqis to be ready to defend themselves.

Neighboring Syria, a longtime U.S. adversary, blasted the pact, saying it rewarded the Americans. But Iran, a sworn U.S. enemy that had been a bitter critic of the pact, took a surprisingly positive stand.

Iran's judiciary chief, Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, said the Iraqi Cabinet acted "very well" in approving the pact. The Web site of Iran's state television quoted him as saying he hoped the U.S. will withdraw its troops within the time specified in the deal.

Although there has been no word from the pact's harshest Iranian critic, hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the shift in Iran's position could be a reflection of Iran's hopes of improved relations with the United States after President-elect Barack Obama takes office Jan. 20.

"Iran is now looking for talks with the U.S. and is trying to reduce tensions ... and Iraq and the security deal are the most visible example of change in Iran's attitude toward America," said Vali Nasr, a prominent U.S.-based expert on Shiite affairs.

Iran sees the continued U.S. presence in Iraq as a threat to its security and is sure to draw satisfaction from Obama's pledge to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq when he takes office.

U.S. and Iraqi officials acknowledge the capabilities of Iraqi security forces have been improving, but doubts persist on whether they have in place a reliable logistical support network, enough discipline and the willingness to operate above the sectarian bias that defines political life in Iraq.