In an announcement that could signal a breakthrough in resolving suspicions over Iran’s nuclear program, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Chief Yukiya Amano announced today that a deal has been reached allowing IAEA inspectors to restart a long-stalled probe into Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Amano, whose announcement comes a day before Iran and the P5+1 begin talks in Baghdad over Iran’s disputed uranium enrichment, is understood to have secured IAEA inspectors access to the Parchin military complex, where the agency believes Iran tested a nuclear weapon triggering device nine years. Iran has dismissed those claims and denied inspectors access, telling the IAEA that the military complex was sufficiently inspected by the agency in 2005.

Amano acknowledged that “some differences” remain with Iranian chief nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili but that the “decision was made to conclude and sign the agreement.”

The agreement is likely to influence the upcoming negotiations in Baghdad at which Iran is expected to seek an easing of economic sanctions — including an embargo on oil deals starting July 1 and new banking restrictions.

Indeed, the new agreement, which is expected to allow inspectors access to previously closed off sites, may pressure the U.S. and other U.N. Security Council countries to offer some form of concessions in exchange for the new access to suspected nuclear sites.

The U.N. has called for a full suspension of Iranian uranium enrichment during the negotiation process but there is growing speculation that the P5+1 may accept low-uranium enrichment — under 20 percent — if inspectors are allowed access to all suspected sites.

The possibility of a brokered agreement in which IAEA inspectors gain access to all facilities and Western powers either postpone or cancel upcoming sanctions in exchange for Iran reducing its nuclear enrichment to under 20-percent could offer a face-saving outcome for both the Iranian government — which could claim victory for its domestic audience — and the U.S. and its allies.

However, Robert Wood, the U.S. envoy to the IAEA, expressed skepticism in a statement, saying Washington remained “concerned by the urgent obligation for Iran to take concrete steps to cooperate fully with the verification efforts of the IAEA, based on IAEA verification practices.”

While the U.S. and other Security Council member countries may be more open to a negotiated agreement, President Obama has committed to “preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon” and emphasized that it is “unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon.” IAEA inspectors have raised questions about possible dual-military-civilian use nuclear technologies but they have not concluded that Iran has decided to restart its nuclear weapons program after its suspension in 2003.

Discussions surrounding Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons ambitions frequently cross the line into unsubstantiated assertions about Iran’s nuclear intentions and capabilities. But in an interview with Haaretz, Israel’s chief military officer offered a more nuanced view of Iran’s nuclear program.

Lieutenant General Benny Gantz told Haaretz that Iran has not yet made critical decisions:

[Iran] is going step by step to the place where it will be able to decide whether to manufacture a nuclear bomb. It hasn’t yet decided whether to go the extra mile.

Gantz also emphasized that Iran is a rational actor, a departure from hawks who claim that Iran’s leadership is irrational:

[The acquisition of a nuclear bomb] will happen if [Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei judges that he is invulnerable to a response. I believe he would be making an enormous mistake, and I don’t think he will want to go the extra mile. I think the Iranian leadership is composed of very rational people. But I agree that such a capability, in the hands of Islamic fundamentalists who at particular moments could make different calculations, is dangerous.

The Israeli military chief said that all options — including the military one — remain on the table for Israel and that “This is a critical year, but not necessarily ‘go, no-go.’” And he reported that diplomatic presure and economic sanctions are begining to bear fruit.

Gantz’s comments contrast with Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hawkish rhetoric on Iran. In an interview with CNN’s Erin Burnett last night, Netanyahu questioned Iran’s rationality:

I don’t think you want to bet the peace in the Middle East and the security of the world on Iran’s rational behavior.

A potential Iranian nuclear weapon is widely considered a threat to both the security of the U.S. and its allies in the region, and the nuclear non-proliferation regime. While hawkish rhetoric towards Iran is becoming a normal occurrence in the political discourses in both Israel and the U.S., neither IAEA, Israeli nor U.S. intelligence estimates conclude that Iran has decided to build a nuclear weapon. The Obama administration has vowed to keep “all options on the table” to deal with the possibility of Iran pursuing a nuclear weapon but the efficacy and consequences of such a military strike continue to raise serious questions.

Speaking before the House Armed Services Committee today, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta suggested that, while specific intelligence is incomplete, there might be something to rumors and accusations that China provided equipment for North Korea’s ballistic missile program in violation of U.N. sanctions. Media reports about the possibly Chinese-designed and -made mobile missile carrier come in the same week as a provocative — and ultimately failed — attempt by North Korea to launch a large rocket that portends development of an intercontinental ballistic missile.

The Washington Times first raised the latest issue on Monday based on photographs from a parade in Pyongyang that appeared to show a mobile missile carrier that closely matched a Chinese design. On Tuesday, Foreign Policy reported that Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH) sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper asking for more information about the allegations.

Today, Panetta was asked about the equipment by Turner and dodged on specifics. He did note, though, that “there is growing concern about, you know, the mobile capabilities that were on display in the parade recently in North Korea.” While he said the U.S. needed to get better intelligence, he added:

I’m sure there’s been some help coming from China. I don’t know, you know, the exact extent of that. I think we’d have to deal with it in another context in terms of the sensitivity of that information. But clearly there’s been assistance along those lines.

Watch the video:

If the allegations are true, they would constitute a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1874 which prohibits arms sales to North Korea. Asked about the report, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman said, “China is always against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”

The Nelson Report, a widely-read and well-sourced daily newsletter about Asian affairs by foreign affairs analyst Chris Nelson, reported that a source confirmed the truck was of Chinese origin:

Tonight, sources we absolutely rely on have come forward with information the carrier is new and cannot have appeared in [North Korea] without the explicit permission of [China]. As our source comments, with understatement: “The political implications of the appearance of Chinese missile transporters at the 15 April parade in Pyongyang are huge. ”

And the source’s source claims Beijing is fully aware of the implications of what it’s done, and that, the source argues, is why China approved stronger language than it’s ever before accepted, in Monday’s UNSC President’s statement.

Nelson comments that China’s embarrassment and quick accession to the Security Council’s unanimous but non-binding Presidential Statement that included a threat to ratchet up sanctions undermines criticisms of the Obama administration and the U.N. that the statement was all bark and no bite.