Nuclear secrecy

Facility inspection results should be public

When it comes to the U.S. nuclear arsenal, some things may always have to be secret. But whether facilities that handle some of the deadliest weapons in existence are passing inspection should not be.

Formerly, the military released the general results of inspections of nuclear bases. Now, the Defense Department has banned such information fromunclassified documents.

The decision was made as part of a secret review of nuclear weapons, personnel and facilities. Ironically, that review may have been prompted by an Associated Press report a few years ago that found lapses in security and training — and the jumpingoff point for that report was publicly available inspection information.

The Pentagon claims the new secrecy helps promote security. But under the circumstances, the move may undermine both security and public confidence.

Government information should normally be available to the public. There are, of course, exceptions, especially for military details: Loose lips, the saying goes, sink ships. But tight lips can do damage too. If security problems never draw public and congressional attention, that makes it less likely they’ll be fixed.

Moving to greater secrecy in this context is suspicious. If the Pentagon is confident that it has brought its nuclear facilities up to expectations, it should be eager to share the inspection results. Also, it’s difficult to see what weaknesses an enemy would discover in the information that problems previouslydiscovered have been fixed.

On the other hand, if the staus of nuclear facilities continues to be unsatisfactory, officials may not want to be publicly accountable. And if conditions still aren’t up to snuff, one can see why they would raise a national security reason for hiding the inspection results.

Whether the motives are base or pure, the secrecy suggests that what is being concealed is bad news. Where our nuclear arsenal is concerned, that’s troubling indeed.