Expert Explains Why Only Two Places On Earth Could Be Safe During A Nuclear War

According to one expert, there are only two places on Earth where people might be safe if a nuclear war were to break out and the answer might catch you off guard.

With conflicts in the Middle East taking center stage in the news recently, and ongoing tensions across various regions, there’s a growing sense of unease about the possibility of another world war, especially one involving nuclear weapons.

Just this past week, the U.S. confirmed that it launched missiles at three nuclear facilities in Iran. This followed earlier attacks by Israel on Iranian military and nuclear sites on June 13.

The U.S. took action after claims surfaced that Iran was actively developing nuclear weapons. Although a ceasefire was later put in place, Israel accused Iran of breaching it by firing missiles—an allegation that Iran denies.

After a heated response from former President Donald Trump, the ceasefire was reinstated and, as of now, appears to be holding steady, according to the Associated Press.

Even though the thought of nuclear war is terrifying for everyone around the world, it turns out that there are a couple of places that might offer a better chance of survival than others.

An expert has revealed the two unexpected places you would be safe in the event of a nuclear war Getty Stock Photo

Author and investigative journalist Annie Jacobsen pointed to Australia and New Zealand as potentially being the safest locations during such a global disaster. She explained that these countries, located in the Southern Hemisphere, may be the only ones able to keep growing food if nuclear fallout were to devastate the planet.

In a conversation with Steven Bartlett on his Diary of a CEO podcast last year, Jacobsen said: "Places like Iowa and Ukraine would be just snow for 10 years. So agriculture would fail and when agriculture fails, people just die."

"On top of that, you have the radiation poisoning because the ozone layer will be so damaged and destroyed that you can't be outside in the sunlight."

"People will be forced to live underground. So you have to imagine people living underground, fighting for food everywhere except for in New Zealand and Australia."

Apparently, Australia and New Zealand would be the safest countries Getty Stock Photo

Jacobsen also went on to talk about the broader effects that nuclear weapons could have on humanity. She referenced research from 2022 by Professor Owen Toon, which outlines just how grim the situation would be.

"Hundreds of millions of people die in the fireballs, no question." said Jacobsen. "Professor Toon and his team... sort of updated the nuclear winter idea based around food, and the number that they have is five billion people would be dead."

When Bartlett asked where someone should go to be among the survivors, Jacobsen didn’t hesitate in her reply.

"The population of the planet currently is what, eight billion?" Bartlett said.

"So there'd be three billion people still alive. Where shall I go to be one of the three billion? I was just in New Zealand and Australia." Bartlett said.

Jacobsen replied: "That's exactly where you'd go. According to Toon, those are the only places that could actually sustain agriculture."

One reason Australia and New Zealand stand out is their distance from major global nuclear powers, which might make them less likely targets in the event of a war.

Meanwhile, Newsweek reviewed maps to assess which areas of the U.S. would be affected in the case of a nuclear strike.

Scientific American also produced a map highlighting missile silo locations in states like Colorado, Wyoming, Nebraska, Montana, and North Dakota, offering a clearer picture of where might be safer during such an attack.

They explained that targeting a missile silo typically takes “one or two nuclear warheads” with explosive power equal to 100,000 tons of TNT.

To be effective, the warheads need to land close to the silos, which would then cause “massive fireballs capable of vaporizing anything nearby.”

In addition to that, the explosions would create “powerful shock waves” that are meant to destroy missiles before they can even launch.

Based on Newsweek’s analysis, the U.S. states that would likely be the safest include: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Washington D.C., Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan.

These areas are considered relatively safer simply because they are the farthest away from key nuclear strike targets.