WASHINGTON - With uncertainty persisting on the U.S.-India nuclear agreement, the State Department has asked lawmakers to keep even unclassified information "secret" out of fear that public disclosure could "torpedo" the deal. Lynne Weil, a spokesperson for the House Foreign Affairs committee, said the State Department provided a lot of information, but the committee has agreed not to disclose the answers because "some data might be considered diplomatically sensitive". She said the nuclear deal still must come back to the Congress for final approval, and, at that point, public hearings will be held and "the questions will come up again". However, the Washington Post said Friday that the deal was in "such desperate" straits that the State Department had imposed the "unusually strict condition" asking the lawmakers to "keep secret" the answers it has provided. The State Department made the request, even though the answers are not classified, because officials fear that public disclosure would torpedo the deal, the daily said citing unnamed sources. Given the pointed nature of the questions, the Post said, the State Department had little choice but to be candid with lawmakers about the answers, in ways that senior State Department officials had not been in public. The State Department said it had no plans to make the answers public. "We've handled answers to sensitive questions in an appropriate way that responded to congressional concerns," said spokesman Tom Casey. "We're going to continue with that approach." One of the questions, it is said, pertains to whether the US would terminate nuclear trade if India resumes nuclear testing, a sensitive point in New Delhi. Though it is required under US law, but the answer is not entirely clear from the text of the US-India agreement. A group of prominent non-proliferation experts have decried the "virtual gag order", but so far the answers have not leaked as only a handful of lawmakers have been able to read them. The Post said Tom Lantos, the late Democratic chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, agreed to the request in February, and the current chairman, Howard  Berman, has abided by that commitment, though Berman is not considered a strong supporter of the deal.