It’s an uncomfortable topic, but with global tensions dominating international news, many people are quietly asking the same question: Where would be safest if World War III ever became a reality?
The world feels increasingly unstable. History has shown that regional conflicts can expand quickly, pulling more nations into prolonged crises. With ongoing military confrontations, diplomatic standoffs, and growing geopolitical uncertainty, concerns about global security are no longer limited to policy experts.
From continued fighting in Eastern Europe and rising tensions in East Asia to instability in the Middle East and missile tests in North Korea, the international landscape is far from calm. Some European governments have even begun issuing civil preparedness guidance, and reports suggest that schools in parts of Germany are being advised to prepare students for emergency scenarios. Elsewhere, diplomatic strains between major powers continue to intensify.
So if the unthinkable were to happen — even involving large-scale or nuclear conflict — are there places on Earth that might offer relative safety?
The realistic answer is that no location would be completely unaffected. However, certain countries and regions consistently rank higher for safety during global crises due to factors like geographic isolation, political neutrality, food security, and limited strategic value.
Below are some of the places most often cited as comparatively safer options, based on global peace rankings, geography, and self-sufficiency.
New Zealand
New Zealand frequently tops lists focused on global safety and crisis resilience. Located deep in the South Pacific, its nearest neighbor is more than 1,200 miles away. It sits far from major military flashpoints and is not considered a high-priority strategic target.
Ranked among the most peaceful countries in the world, New Zealand benefits from strong agriculture, renewable energy, and political stability. Researchers and risk analysts often highlight it as one of the best places to weather major global disruptions.
For those seeking something similar but closer to North America, parts of Western Australia, particularly around Perth, share many of the same advantages: isolation, resources, and low population density.
Iceland
Often ranked as the most peaceful country globally, Iceland’s remote position in the North Atlantic provides natural insulation from large-scale conflicts. While it is a NATO member, its direct military involvement is minimal, focusing mainly on diplomatic and logistical support.
Iceland’s lack of hostile neighbors, combined with abundant geothermal energy and a small population, makes it relatively resilient. While fallout from mainland Europe could theoretically reach it, direct conflict remains unlikely.
Chile
Chile enjoys strong natural protection thanks to the Andes Mountains on one side and the Pacific Ocean on the other. South America as a whole lies far from most global military tensions, giving the region an added layer of security.
With nearly 4,000 miles of coastline, diverse climates, and strong agricultural output, Chile is well-positioned for long-term sustainability. Its modern infrastructure and economic stability further enhance its appeal during periods of global uncertainty.
Botswana
Southern Africa is geographically removed from the world’s primary geopolitical hotspots. Botswana stands out in the region for its political stability, low corruption, and neutral foreign policy.
Rich in natural resources and surrounded by similarly low-risk neighbors, Botswana — along with Namibia and remote areas of South Africa — is often cited as one of Africa’s safest options in a global crisis scenario.
Bhutan
Tucked deep within the Himalayas, Bhutan’s extreme terrain and limited accessibility make it one of the hardest countries to reach. Its long-standing commitment to neutrality and low international profile further reduce its strategic importance.
Situated between India and China yet maintaining careful diplomatic balance, Bhutan’s isolation and geography make it an unlikely focal point in any worldwide conflict.
Switzerland
Switzerland is practically synonymous with neutrality, a position it has upheld for more than 200 years — including during both World Wars.
Its mountainous landscape, extensive civil-defense infrastructure, and widespread access to bomb shelters provide exceptional preparedness. The country also produces a significant portion of its own food and maintains strict non-involvement policies, even blocking the re-export of Swiss-made weapons.
These factors continue to make Switzerland one of Europe’s most secure and resilient nations during times of global instability.
Antarctica
While not a country, Antarctica is about as far removed from geopolitical conflict as it gets. There are no permanent residents, no military installations, and no strategic value.
Survival would be extremely challenging without preparation, but in terms of avoiding human conflict entirely, Antarctica remains one of the most isolated places on Earth.
Argentina
Argentina’s sheer size, low population density, and distance from major global power centers make it another strong candidate. The country is a major producer of food, including wheat and beef, which is crucial in any long-term global disruption.
While it has experienced conflict in the past, its current geopolitical position and agricultural capacity provide a level of resilience few countries can match.
Fiji
Located roughly 2,700 miles from Australia, Fiji sits deep in the Pacific Ocean. Despite limited involvement during World War II, it escaped widespread destruction.
With a small defense force, minimal geopolitical influence, and a consistently high ranking on the Global Peace Index, Fiji offers isolation, stability, and access to natural resources essential for basic living.
Canada (Remote Regions)
Canada’s vast size works to its advantage. While major cities could be vulnerable due to their economic and political importance, large portions of the country remain sparsely populated.
Remote areas in central and northern Canada offer fresh water, natural resources, and geographic seclusion — all valuable assets during a global emergency.
Tuvalu and Other Pacific Island Nations
Small island nations such as Tuvalu, Samoa, and Kiribati have very low geopolitical profiles. They hold little strategic value and are rarely involved in international disputes.
In a global conflict, their neutrality, isolation, and access to fishing and local food sources could be major advantages.
Final Thoughts
While no place is immune from the effects of a worldwide crisis, geography, neutrality, and self-sufficiency play major roles in reducing risk. These locations are often highlighted not because they guarantee safety, but because they offer relative stability in an unpredictable world.
Which country or region do you think would offer the best chance of safety in a global conflict? Share your thoughts and perspectives below.