Although the Cold War is over, should we still be living in nuclear fear?

Countries long-known as nuclear powerhouses are reducing their stockpiles because of the cost, danger and inconvenience of storing nuclear weapons, said award-winning scientist and interpreter of science and society Freeman Dyson.

As part of a panel discussion Wednesday at noon in the Memorial Union Sun Room, Dyson and four others spoke to a group of about 200 about the direction of nuclear weaponry in the future.

Dyson, a professor emeritus of physics at the Institute of Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., was given a National Book Critics Circle Award for his 1984 non-fiction work “Weapons and Hope,” an examination of nuclear weapons.

Other panel members were James McCormick, professor of political science; Carolyn James, political science instructor and John Kihl, professor of political science. Patrick James, chair of the political science department, was the moderator.

“It’s a fact that George Bush in 1991 got rid of the majority of nuclear weapons,” Dyson said. As a unilateral movement, Bush made the statement, “‘We don’t need all these nukes. Let’s get rid of them,'” Dyson said.

Because of that movement, surface ships and land-based army units no longer carry nuclear weapons. Additionally, the number of types of nuclear weapons has decreased since 1991 from 30 to seven.

Besides the obvious cost of designing and producing nuclear weapons, Dyson cited danger as one of the reasons stockpiles are decreasing. After visiting a U.S. Navy ship that had nuclear weapons in storage, and later during the Gulf War, seeing the same ship undergo damage, Dyson realized the danger of sea vessels carrying large numbers of nuclear weapons.

The panel also discussed the need to find a new way to care for and dispose of the plutonium taken from dismantled nuclear weapons.

“We don’t want to have hundreds of tons of plutonium around we’ll have to baby-sit,” Dyson said.

While the final goal is to get rid of all nuclear weapons, Dyson does not see that happening in the near future. The reason for having nuclear weapons is the idea that they will deter opposing groups from taking action against your group. This deterrence is considered to be a reason against total disarmament.

McCormick wondered if the deterrence factor is real or imagined.

“The military’s perception is that they don’t want to be caught without weapons. They always want to have more than their opponent,” Dyson said.

“I believe we should go to zero [weapons]. That doesn’t mean they are all going to magically disappear,” Dyson said. He said even in banning all nuclear weapons, there will always be some weapon stockpiles.

“In the end, each country has to decide for itself. I hope we will reach a decision in 50 years,” he said.