Mon Feb 11, 2:36 AM ET
By GEORGE GEDDA, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Iran may be just a few years away from developing nuclear weapons capability, contributing to a sense of urgency on the need for a more assertive policy toward that strategically placed country, U.S. officials say.

The Bush administration's concern over a variety of Iranian weapons programs has been coupled with what it says is an expanded Iranian role in support of regional and global terrorist groups.
For a time last fall, there were glimmers of hope that the two countries, implacable rivals since 1979, could find some common ground on terrorism.
But those hopes have faded in recent weeks as the administration concluded that Iran has added new frontiers in its pursuit of a radical Islamic agenda.
President Bush (news - web sites)'s more belligerent anti-Iran stance prompted leaders in Tehran to make anti-Americanism the main theme of demonstrations planned Monday on the 23rd anniversary of the Iranian revolution.
Bush included Iran as a member the "axis of evil" in his State of the Union speech Jan. 29. He said Iran "aggressively pursues" weapons of mass destruction and "exports terror," and that "an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom."
CIA (news - web sites) Director George Tenet told a Senate hearing last Wednesday that Iran may be able by itself to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon by late this decade.
But he went on to say this estimate could be cut by years if Iran is able to obtain materials from outside sources.
A CIA report issued a week earlier said Iran "remains one of the most active countries seeking to acquire (weapons of mass destruction and advanced conventional weapons) technology from abroad."
"In doing so, Tehran is attempting to develop a domestic capability to produce various types of weapons -- chemical, biological, and nuclear -- and their delivery systems," the report said.
Earlier CIA estimates projected that by 2015 the United States most likely will face intercontinental ballistic missile threats from Iran as well as North Korea (news - web sites), and possibly from Iraq.
Just what the administration plans to do to counter

these perceived challenges is not clear.
Last week, Iran's Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi denied that Tehran is seeking weapons of mass destruction and said that it -- unlike the United States -- was adhering to international weapons treaties.
He accused this country of torpedoing efforts to give teeth to the treaty banning biological weapons and of trying to undermine the Chemical Weapons Convention. He also criticised it for abandoning the nuclear test ban treaty.
Following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the normally querulous mood between Tehran and Washington eased somewhat. Iran denounced the attacks and also shared intelligence on terrorism with U.S. officials.
Iran, long opposed to the Taliban regime in neighbouring Afghanistan (news - web sites), also co-operated with the United States and other countries in laying the groundwork for a successor government in Kabul. It also promised generous reconstruction assistance for Afghanistan. Contacts between American and Iranian diplomats were cordial.
Now relations again are at a low point. Of particular concern to the United States were Iran's alleged role in an abortive attempt to ship 50 tons of weapons to the Palestinian Authority (news - web sites) and an effort by Tehran to undermine the new interim government in Afghanistan.
Javad Zarif, an Iranian deputy foreign minister, denied both allegations in an interview Sunday with Fox News. He also rejected suggestions that Iran was harboring al-Qaida militants who had fled Afghanistan.
But Patrick Clawson, who follows Iran at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said Iran appears to be pursuing a two-tiered policy toward Afghanistan.
Iran's moderate elected authority is seeking friendly ties with Afghanistan, even as a separate, hard-line, clergy-run apparatus tries to ensure the failure of the pro-Western government in Kabul, Clawson said in an interview.
"There is a split between the revolutionary institutions and the formal government structure," Clawson said, adding, "This situation is likely to go on for a number of years."