British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, arrives in Tehran today amid some reports that he is carrying a message from the White House officials for the Iranian authorities. Hosting the British foreign secretary at a time when the military forces of this country are getting prepared to attack Afghanistan and massacre innocent Afghans along with U.S. forces is a rather questionable move. But now that the Iranian officials have decided to do so, some points should be taken into consideration.

It is clear that the message is aimed at securing Iran's cooperation with the United States in attacking Afghanistan. Generally speaking, Iran's position on the Afghan issue is significant from two aspects. First, Iran's approval of or opposition to U.S. military aggression on Afghanistan may directly affect these operations. In other words, Iran's position can make the military operations easier or more difficult for the U.S. forces. Second, the position of Iran, as a revolutionary government, can strongly influence the opinion of the Muslim nations.

What the U.S. considers the most significant is the influence of Iran's stance on the public opinion in the Islamic world. Therefore, Washington is trying to achieve two goals by getting Iran's cooperation in its willful operations and announcing this cooperation through its media. First, considering the high regard of Muslims for the revolutionary government of Iran, it intends to dishearten the Muslims and minimize the Islamic world's reaction to its military operations. The second goal, which is even more important, is that Washington aims to undermine Iran's status in the Islamic world by obtaining its cooperation.

Washington is trying to achieve these goals, while Iranian officials have already announced their unwillingness to cooperate with the U.S. to attack Afghanistan. However, during the recent days, certain Iranian parties issued some statements that implied willingness to cooperate with Washington in its aggression. This is something that can be exploited by the U.S. and its allies.

Given above, what is even more important than the contents of talks between British and Iranian officials is the transparency of such talks, so that the Iranian and world public may be well informed in this regard. It is quite certain that after the end of these talks and upon Straw's return to London, the U.S. military machine will wage its premeditated aggression on Afghanistan regardless of the outcome of the Tehran talks. It is also likely that some Western media and propaganda circles may try to tell the Islamic world that the Iranian officials during their talks with the British side approved of the U.S. military aggression or at least expressed their acquiescence.

What can prevent this smear campaign is transparency in talks between the Iranian and British officials. In other words, it is not enough just to inform the public of the outlines of the talks. Furthermore, rapid information dissemination regarding the contents of talks is also of great importance.

In general, in the sphere of news and propaganda, whoever breaks a story first gets the upper hand over others. Therefore, any delays on the part of Iranian officials in revealing the contents of the Tehran talks could have negative consequences, as the other side may provide the public with a distorted account of what was discussed in Tehran.

Hence, at this sensitive juncture, the Iranian officials should announce their principled stance to the world clearly as soon as their talks with the British side are over.