O29 · Failure outcome · Named · National Security

Loss of strategic deterrence

The safe, controlled and dependable operation of the nation's nuclear deterrent and associated warning systems can no longer be assured.

Why it matters

Unreliable nuclear control and warning undermine deterrence and increase the risk of catastrophic misjudgement.

Signs it has been reached

Strategic warning systems persistently fail reliability requirements
Deterrent availability falls below approved operational requirements
Weapons custody or command authorisation cannot be independently verified

Met when

The mean score of these 3 capability groups falls a full band (3 points).

Nuclear Deterrence
Strategic Strike & Missile Defence
Space Operations

Held by two of the three panel models.

Read with care

Third illustrative run, on the second-pass scenario set. The capability scores are candidate ratings and the test settings were drafted with the scenario records in the second pass; neither has been adopted. Scores are from the GINC National Capability Index 2026, which describes them as candidate ratings. Exposure is set nation by nation from the CIA World Factbook 2025 and the scenario's regional exposure. Results show the method working on real scores; they are not findings about any nation. How the tests work.

Reverse stress test

Working backwards from this outcome to the scenarios and conditions most likely to produce it, nation by nation, over 10 years.

Nations with a route: 40; of 197
Typical likelihood: none; median nation, over 10 years
Leads most routes: Regional war spillover; 34 of 40 nations
Typical headroom: ×4.9; times Standard Severe, nearest single scenario

What produces it

Each nation’s most likely route, counted three ways: the scenario that does most of the work, the form the route takes, and the capability where a change would move the result most.

Lead scenario

Nations

Regional war spillover

Cryptographic trust break

Legitimacy rupture

Form of the route

Nations

Two scenarios together

One scenario, with plans failing

Weakest buffer

Nations

Maritime Power

Resource Infrastructure

Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance

Quantum Technologies

National Resilience & Crisis Management

Likelihood, by region

One dot per nation. The bar marks each region’s mean. Further right is more likely.

North America
Europe
China
Indo-Pacific
South Asia
Gulf and Middle East
Africa
Latin America and Caribbean
Russia and Eurasia

Most likely: North Korea 1.2%, Iran 0.8%, Taiwan 0.2%, France 0.2%, United Kingdom 0.2%.

Does a strong starting point protect?

Each nation’s score on this basket today against the likelihood of the outcome.

North America
Europe
China
Indo-Pacific
South Asia
Gulf and Middle East
Africa
Latin America and Caribbean
Russia and Eurasia

All 197 nations

The route shown is the most likely one, and the basket column shows the band the nation would move to. A full band is the same fall for every nation: for a strong nation it is serious but leaves it well above where a weak nation starts. Where no route was found, the closest approach is the furthest any condition moved the basket, against the 3 points needed.

Region

Route

All 197 nations

Find a nation

197 of 197 nations

Rank	Nation	Region	Basket	Likelihood	3 years	Most likely route	Headroom	Breaks first	Lever
1	North Korea	Indo-Pacific	8.8 Foundational → Nascent	1.2% Possible	0.4%	Regional war spillover Extremeplans fail	×1.9 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance 1.8
2	Iran	Gulf and Middle East	7.6 Foundational → Nascent	0.8% Unlikely	0.2%	Regional war spillover Extremeplans fail	×2.4 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance 6.5
3	Taiwan	Indo-Pacific	7.9 Foundational → Nascent	0.2% Unlikely	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Majorplans fail	×3.0 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Alliances & Security Cooperation 8.5
4	France	Europe	16.6 Advanced → Established	0.2% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Severe+Cryptographic trust break Severeplans fail	×4.6 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 12.5
5	United Kingdom	Europe	15.3 Advanced → Established	0.2% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Majorplans fail	×5.2 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 14.3
6	Belgium	Europe	4.1 Nascent → Inception	0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Severe+Hybrid coercion Extremeplans fail	×2.9 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 7.8
7	South Korea	Indo-Pacific	10.4 Transitional → Foundational	0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Majorplans fail	×3.9 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 11.8
8	Lithuania	Europe	3.6 Nascent → Inception	0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×3.4 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 4.8
9	India	South Asia	14.3 Established → Transitional	0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Severe+Legitimacy rupture Extremeplans fail	×4.4 S05	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Public Integrity & Anti-Corruption 10
11	Belarus	Russia and Eurasia	4.2 Nascent → Inception	0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Legitimacy rupture Severeplans fail	×2.4 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 1
10	Pakistan	South Asia	10.4 Transitional → Foundational	0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Severe+Legitimacy rupture Extremeplans fail	×3.5 S05	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Justice System & Fundamental Rights 6.8
16	Qatar	Gulf and Middle East	4.0 Nascent → Inception	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×3.3 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 6.5
13	Switzerland	Europe	4.2 Nascent → Inception	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×3.4 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 0.3
15	Czechia	Europe	3.8 Nascent → Inception	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×3.5 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 0.5
12	Netherlands	Europe	6.8 Foundational → Nascent	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Cryptographic trust break Majorplans fail	×3.9 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 13
14	Poland	Europe	6.7 Foundational → Nascent	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×4.3 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 8.8
17	Finland	Europe	5.8 Nascent → Inception	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×4.8 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 10
19	Greece	Europe	5.2 Nascent → Inception	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Cryptographic trust break Severeplans fail	×4.0 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 10
18	Singapore	Indo-Pacific	6.3 Foundational → Nascent	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×4.1 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 8.8
21	Türkiye	Gulf and Middle East	8.0 Foundational → Nascent	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Cryptographic trust break Severeplans fail	×3.7 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance 12
22	United Arab Emirates	Gulf and Middle East	6.9 Foundational → Nascent	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Cryptographic trust break Severeplans fail	×4.3 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 9.3
20	Sweden	Europe	6.4 Foundational → Nascent	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×4.8 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 10.8
25	Italy	Europe	8.3 Foundational → Nascent	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Cryptographic trust break Severeplans fail	×3.8 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Resource Infrastructure 12
23	Germany	Europe	8.8 Foundational → Nascent	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Extreme+Hybrid coercion Severeplans fail	×4.0 S03	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Maritime Power 12.5
24	Israel	Gulf and Middle East	15.3 Advanced → Established	under 0.1% Remote	under 0.1%	Regional war spillover Severe+Cryptographic trust break Extremeplans fail	×5.5 S09	Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	Quantum Technologies 13.5

Showing 1–25 of 197 nations · page 1 of 8

Neighbouring outcomes

Download every nation and outcome (CSV)All outcomes and settings

A failure outcome is met when the basket falls a full band, which is three points. A prosperity outcome is met when the basket rises half a band, 1.5 points: in this model gains from a scenario are smaller and slower than losses, so the bar is set lower and the difference is stated.