Determining the safest country during a war is a complex question with many factors to consider. Key considerations include a country’s geographic location, military capabilities, alliance systems, and preparedness measures. While no country may be completely safe during a major conflict, certain nations are better positioned than others to deter and defend against aggression.
What Makes a Country Safer in War?
Some of the main factors that contribute to a country’s safety during wartime include:
- Geographic isolation – Countries far away from conflict zones or potential adversaries have an inherent advantage. For example, New Zealand’s remote location offers protection.
- Strong military – Robust armed forces with advanced capabilities can deter and repel attacks. Countries like the U.S. and Russia have powerful militaries.
- Alliance networks – Membership in defense pacts like NATO provides collectivized security. An attack on one member is treated as an attack on all.
- Civil defense – Widespread emergency preparation among the population increases resilience. Switzerland is renowned for shelter networks and trained reservists.
- Disaster readiness – Investments in infrastructure hardening and contingency planning improve response to crises and instability.
- Self-sufficiency – Domestic production of essentials like food and energy reduces reliance on potentially disrupted trade flows during war.
Nations with favorable combinations of these attributes have stronger deterrence postures and greater capacity to safeguard their homelands during military clashes. Geography and allies matter greatly, but how countries utilize their resources also affects their defensive abilities.
Switzerland – A Model of Preparedness
While situated in central Europe surrounded by potential adversaries, Switzerland has developed a high degree of wartime readiness. For example:
- Hardened infrastructure – Bridges, airports, and rail lines include fortifications and quick repairs are feasible.
- Extensive shelters – shelters with space for the entire population have been constructed throughout the country.
- Civil defense training – Compulsory military service trains every male in armed and unarmed defense.
- Mountain redoubts – Switzerland’s alpine geography provides natural defensive advantage.
- Stockpiling – Large reserves of essential resources are maintained for self-sufficiency.
As a result, Switzerland could likely sustain its key systems and shelter its populace during a major conflict. Its national resilience serves as a model for riding out wartime disruption.
Neutrality and Alliances
In addition to internal preparations, Switzerland’s long-standing neutrality and lack of entanglements enhances its wartime security. By abstaining from geopolitical disputes and not joining traditional alliances like NATO, Switzerland reduces its chances of being a direct target in a wider conflagration. Its form of armed neutrality is rare but rational given its geographical position.
Conversely, countries integrated in confrontational alliances like NATO and the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War would have seen their fates tied to the overall success or failure of their bloc. Even with the protection of mutual defense commitments, their solidarity ensures risks are shared. Fortunately, the modern NATO alliance has proven remarkably successful at deterring aggression and would provide substantial safety benefits to its members in any major conflict.
Geography and Proximity
Proximity to danger zones directly correlates to the threat level for nations during wartime. Nearby conflicts can easily spill across borders as refugees, disruptions to commerce, and actual combat. Iraq’s wars with Iran in the 1980s and Kuwait and the U.S. in the 1990s illustrate how neighboring states suffer collateral impacts. Therefore, prudent countries pursue both internal capabilities for self-protection and external policies that avoid surrounding tensions.
The related factor of geography also greatly affects wartime security. Defensible terrain with limited access points, such as islands and mountainous regions, benefits defenders. Conversely, open plains and coastal areas are vulnerable to assault. Switzerland’s mountain redoubt security strategy capitalizes on its imposing altitude and ridges. Small island nations also benefit from their natural moats and distance from conflict flashpoints, despite typically having modest military forces.
Globalization Risks
Modern globalization also poses novel risks during major wars. Previously self-sufficient countries now rely on extended supply chains for imports of critical items like fuels, foods, and medicines. Cyberattacks and disruption of financial networks are also new threats. So while leading trading nations like Singapore and Taiwan are geographically insulated, a sustained naval blockade couldchallenge their survival. This means stockpiling and hardening key systems is now imperative everywhere, not just in regions contiguous to strife.
Wealth and Military Power
In general, the planet’s wealthiest countries in North America, Europe, and East Asia have inherent wartime advantages. Their advanced militaries, robust transportation networks, and high-tech civil defenses exceed most global peers. Wealth enables significant infrastructure investments and cutting-edge technologies that bolster resilience. Consequently, even without combat taking place on their soil, these powerful nations can credibly promise their citizens a reasonable degree of safety during distant conflicts. Their full panoply of civilian and military capabilities distinguishes them from developing counterparts.
Democratic Peace Theory
According to the democratic peace theory, democracies rarely go to war with other democracies. This is believed to be because of their shared political norms, non-violent dispute resolution mechanisms, and accountability to electorates. For this reason, nations like those in Scandinavia that are both fully democratic and not part of traditional alliances are thought to be especially secure during potential great power wars. Their professed political neutrality and lack of external threats inhibits any ideological rationales for others to attack them.
Weapons of Mass Destruction
A major wild card affecting security calculations is the increasing proliferation of highly destructive weapons like nuclear arms, biological agents, and cyber tools. Even remote and isolated countries could suffer severe damage from an intentional or accidental use of these arms during wartime. And no state can reliably shield its populace and infrastructure from the catastrophic effects of nukes. So while location and defenses provide advantages, WMDs introduce greater uncertainty in any major conflict. Their presence demands all nations have contingency plans for dire scenarios.
Self-Sufficient Island Nations as Safe Havens
When weighing all factors, relatively self-sufficient island countries in the southern hemisphere appear best positioned to reliably sustain and protect their populations during a global war. Their geographic isolation, limited strategic value, and ability to independently produce necessities like food bestow natural security benefits. Examples of such insular nations include:
- New Zealand
- Iceland
- Malta
- Trinidad and Tobago
- Madagascar
These islands are remote from potential flashpoints, lack involvement in conflicts or alliances, and have viable independent economies. While their small populations and modest militaries limit their capacity to deter attacks, invading them also offers little strategic rationale during wider clashes between great powers. Overall, their relative self-reliance and detachment from foreign disputes enhances their prospects of safely riding out wartime shocks.
New Zealand as War Haven Benchmark
New Zealand exemplifies the ideal attributes of an insulated island war haven. It enjoys geographic isolation in the South Pacific, limited military threats, political neutrality, and economic self-sufficiency. Key advantages include:
- 2,500+ miles from Australia and 3,300 miles from Antarctica
- Temperate climate supports agricultural production
- Modern infrastructure suitable for adaptation to wartime needs
- Minimal strategic value outside economic resources
- Historic bans on nuclear material and arms
- Not part of power bloc alliances like NATO
While not completely immune from global crises, New Zealand possesses multiple inherent security buffers. Its combination of natural and manmade attributes make it arguably the most insulated and protected nation during potential widespread conflicts. New Zealand illustrates how favorable geography and proactive policies can align to substantially improve wartime survival prospects.
Conclusion
Picking the single safest country during a global war is ultimately subjective given varying threats and conflict scenarios. However, self-reliant and detached island nations like New Zealand appear best positioned for security. Their isolation and independence provide strategic depth and enable self-sufficiency. Countries like Switzerland also demonstrate how a landlocked state can maximize defenses through strong militaries, civil preparation, and neutrality. Yet geography remains a prime factor, with oceans providing the ultimate barrier and buffer. There are no guarantees, but prudent countries must strengthen military deterrence, stockpile necessities, harden infrastructure, train citizens, and enact policies that steer clear of tensions. With wise investments and smart statecraft, even peripheral nations can substantially improve their resilience and ride out widespread disruptions during wartime.