With nuclear threats reappearing in global headlines, many wonder whether any place on Earth could truly be safe in a large-scale nuclear war. Experts stress such a conflict is unlikely, but its consequences would be catastrophic. Investigative journalist Annie Jacobsen argues survival would depend less on blast shelters and more on geography, climate, and food security. She suggests New Zealand and Australia could offer better odds of long-term survival, not by avoiding explosions alone, but by enduring what follows—especially famine caused by “nuclear winter.”
Jacobsen discussed this on The Diary of a CEO, hosted by Steven Bartlett. She explained that “nuclear winter” could result when massive firestorms send soot into the atmosphere, blocking sunlight and cooling the planet. With reduced sunlight, agriculture across much of the Northern Hemisphere could collapse. She cited projections that regions like the American Midwest and Eastern Europe could face years of crop failure, leading to famine that could kill more people than the blasts themselves.
This view draws heavily on research by atmospheric scientist Owen Toon, whose models show even a limited nuclear exchange could disrupt global food production. In worst cases, “billions could face starvation.” Additional threats include ozone depletion, increased ultraviolet radiation, and contamination that could make farming dangerous or impossible in many regions.
Geography is key. New Zealand and Australia are far from many primary nuclear targets, unlike parts of the United States, where missile fields and military sites could be struck. Analyses in Scientific American describe how such areas could face immediate devastation from high-yield warheads.
Other outlets, including Newsweek, note that even regions avoiding direct hits would still suffer fallout, food shortages, and economic collapse. Experts emphasize that no place would be fully safe. The core message is prevention: nuclear winter research highlights the immense humanitarian cost of nuclear war, underscoring that the only truly safe outcome is ensuring such a conflict never occurs.
