Now that the agenda for #nukecon has been fully announced, here is the gender balance of our speakers and panelists. Once again, a majority are women.
Female panelists: 53% (26/49)
Male panelists: 47% (23/49)
(1/9)
The % of moderators who are women (54% or 7/13) is essentially identical to the overall % of speakers and panelists who are women (53% or 36/49). (2/9)
And here are the geographic diversity stats:
United States: 55% (27/49)
Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand: 24% (12/49)
Rest of world: 20% (10/49)
% of Americans is similar to 2019 and 2021.
(3/9)
.@carnegienpp is committed to transparency about the gender balance and geographic origins of #nukecon speakers and panelists, as part of our broader DEI efforts. (4/9)
As part of these efforts, we are also hosting a panel on “Will We Know It When We See It? Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Nuclear Policy.” (5/9)
Some fine print. All data is provisional because last minute changes to the agenda are occasionally unavoidable, though all speakers and panelists are confirmed. (6/9)
Only speakers and panelists in substantive sessions are included. Welcome/goodbye remarks and award ceremony participants are not. (7/9)
Speakers and panelists in sessions organized by other organizations (morning side session and Thursday lunch session) are not included (though diversity is one of our criteria for the selection of these sessions). (8/9)
Geographic origin is taken to be citizenship, except for permanent residents living abroad, who are classed by country of residency. Inevitably, some guesswork is required here. (9/9)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
.@rafaelmgrossi: Iran problem is becoming more and more “relevant” every day. (“I’m choosing a neutral word, ‘relevant.’”) #nukecon
.@rafaelmgrossi’s vision for IAEA: Use mandate to the full. Deal with tough problems. It’s easy to hold symposia on nuclear safety. But when a nuclear power plant is being shelled, the IAEA has to get involved. #nukecon
Welcome to day two of #nukecon! We’re going to discuss the deterrence and escalation implications of new delivery system technologies with @LauraEGrego, Greg Weaver, Sun Xiangli, and @ElenaChernenko.
.@LauraEGrego: New technologies won’t undermine U.S.-Chinese or U.S.-Russian mutual vulnerability, but could lead to escalation in crises because, for example, of the difficulty of distinguishing a space launch from a FOBs launch. #nukecon
Weaver: Maneuverability of hypersonic systems complicates assessing which targets are under attack.
FOBs/MOBs are more concerning. Potentially extremely short warning times; could undermine ICBM/leadership survivability. #nukecon
Final panel of day 1 of #nukecon. Under Secretary of State Bonnie Jenkins, @UnderSecT, and NNSA Administrator Jill Hruby, @NNSAHruby, are in conversation with @nktpnd.
.@UnderSecT: The predictability created by arms control is more impact than ever. #nukecon
.@UnderSecT: In scoping out possible future arms control, admin discussed wide range of capabilities with Russia (including hypersonics and cyber). Moreover, arms control is about more than limits; also transparency and norms (including in space). #nukecon
.@G_Zlauvinen: Russian behavior puzzling. We were expecting Ru delegation to be led by Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov, but Ru didn’t submit visa application for him. Still, probably didn’t affect final outcome. #nukecon
.@G_Zlauvinen: Even in the absence of a final document, we proved the system worked. States engaged in actual negotiations over all aspects of NPT implementation. #nukecon
First panel at #nukecon. Can the Ukraine war end without nuclear use?
@KoriSchake argues that if the U.S. gets intel that Russia is preparing to use nuclear weapons, it should provide that intel to Ukraine so Kiev can preempt.
.@PatPorter76: U.S. interests in Ukraine are limited. Needs to ask questions about which weapons to supply to Ukraine and what limits (including geographical) it should attach to supply.
As @MMazarr put, Pat is a looming presence over this panel.
Ash Carter will probably (and rightly!) be remembered for his public service, but don't forget his scholarship, which was excellent--and sometimes truly extraordinary.
For work on technology, it has a rare timelessness that makes it useful after 30 or 40 years. (1/n)
"Managing Nuclear Operations," which Carter co-edited, is a masterpiece--especially his own chapters. His chapter on communications for nuclear command-and-control is the best (unclassified) piece written on the subject. Period. (2/n)
His 1984 @Journal_IS essay on "Satellites and Anti-Satellites" was pathbreaking. Some aspects have been overtaken by technological developments, but you'll still learn much more from reading it than many of today's more breathless studies. (3/n)