The lay observer never sees this. Even those holding a basic security clearance to grant access up to Top Secret material seldom gain visibility into the arcane aspects of defense contracting. Specifically, this contracting starts in the millions of dollars and eludes normal scrutiny and traditional contracting oversight because of its involvement of sophisticated technology we must keep under wraps in order to preserve our lead over present and future adversaries. This is the world of carve-out and special access programs whose price of admission is a Top Secret clearance and whose secrecy historically extends to masking what standard classified programs will not bother to conceal: the actual application of the technology and even the identification of the specific, government customer.
As a little heralded legal action reveals, however, there is more at stake in this world than national security. As today's inside look at legal wrangling suggests (available at http://mw.cnn.com/snarticle?c=cnnd_us&p=0&aId=20110118:scotus.state.secrets:1), artful use of secrecy covers mistakes. The government can use this device to cancel expensive contracts capriciously while foreclosing normal contractor rights to recover losses incurred in good faith. Similarly, contractors can play this secrecy card to claim important technical details were withheld, hence justifying cost and schedule overruns. In practice, as Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts noted in hearing arguments about the cancelled A-12 fighter program, the use of existing secrecy laws this way makes it nearly impossible for an impartial arbiter to affix blame on one party or the other. Compounding this case, its 20-year latency makes it highly likely that principals from either litigating camp are long gone or have already answered to a higher court for any manipulation of the system. In the case of this ill-fated fighter program, its use of stealth technology probably supplied the justification for moving out of the normal contracting arena and into the more recondite subworld governed by secrecy laws.
What is the point? Secrecy and the security apparatus erected to preserve it lose credibility and user acceptance when abused for ulterior motives like this. It should be no surprise, then, for security professionals to encounter a certain degree of jaded questioning or doubt when working with special access program veterans -- from the public or private sector -- who still wear the burn marks from being professionally disadvantaged by abuse of secrecy to advance or cancel a major program that affected their livelihood. Sometimes security is left to absorb the counterpunch of the unfairly bruised.
-- Nick Catrantzos
Subscribe Now
AddThis
Nick Catrantzos + Tom Goff
- All Secure
- NICK CATRANTZOS is the lead author of the All Secure website and is the emeritus security director for a large public organization. He has also managed security aspects of corporate takeovers, response to international hostage situations, and finding and keeping secrets. He has been board certified in security management, licensed as a private investigator, and certified as an incident commander. He worked as a case officer for a discreet branch of public service. He protected stealth technology at Lockheed and, later, as a consulting security director for both Kroll and Control Risks, he assisted executives with workplace violence cases and with protecting VIPs and critical assets globally in volatile areas. Nick's partner, TOM GOFF, was a captain in the Military Police Corps, U.S. Army Reserve and has a law degree from the University of California at Davis. He is a former reporter for Fortune Magazine, was senior editor at New York Magazine and Esquire, and has provided crisis and communications counsel to senior executives at Fortune 500 companies, including Lockheed, ARCO, Microsoft, Nissan, and Sony Pictures.