Do small countries have an easier task of maintaining secrecy?

In the light of the Bradley Manning trial and the snickering directed at the United States, your author was drawn to consider the task of maintaining secrecy. This mainly refers to defence arrangements and intelligence - commercial and private organizations' secrets are another kettle of fish.

Put simply: while smaller, "second-tier" nations may have an easier task of maintaining secrecy. Countries like Singapore, South Korea and South Africa have less resources to commit to keeping their secrets confidential, their limited interests and global footprint may possibly serve to keep them off the radar. 

This may allow them to have an easier task of maintaining secrecy, compared to nations such as the US or Russia that are on everyone's radar.

On the other hand, delving deeper into this; the security arrangements of these small states may in fact be an open book to others, something that a penetrating organization would not wish to call attention to. The central problem is the nature of the topic - secret things are secret, as some might say.

Due to lack of information (and your author's lack of statistics training), any more speculation on this weak point can only be conjecture.

At best, the limited interests of these nations reduce the incentive for any would-be spies to make a splash globally, and reduce the numbers of those who would seek to uncover national secrets like hidden weapons programs, illegal spying or government leaders' foibles. A secret Chinese facility in the desert might raise eyebrows, but the same going up in Singapore may not hold the same value internationally.