Munk Debates

Intellectual juggernaut and staunch atheist Christopher Hitchens goes head-to-head with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, one of the Western world's most openly devout political leaders, on the highly charged topic of religion. Few world leaders have had a greater hand in shaping current events than Blair, few writers have been more outspoken and polarizing than Hitchens. In this edition of The Munk Debates -- Canada's premier international debate series -- Hitchens and Blair square off on the contentious questions that continue to dog the topic of religion in our globalized world. How does faith influence our actions? What is the role of people of faith in the public sphere? Is religious doctrine rigid, or should we allow for flexibility in our interpretations? This exclusive debate, which played out to a sold-out audience, is now available in print form, along with candid interviews with Hitchens and Blair. Sharp, provocative, and thoroughly engrossing, Hitchens vs. Blair is a rigorous and electrifying intellectual sparring match on the oldest question, is religion a force for good in the world?

The Munk Debates is Canada's premier international debate series, a highly anticipated cultural event and feast of ideas. Launched in 2008 by philanthropists Peter and Melanie Munk, these debates bring together some of the world's greatest thinkers to discuss the most pressing political, social, and cultural issues that are shaping the course of world events. This volume includes an Introduction by Peter Munk and the first five debates in the series: British historian and bestselling author Niall Ferguson, top-ranking American diplomat Richard Holbrooke, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, and human rights scholar and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Samantha Power discuss global security and the 2008 U.S. presidential election, Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, former Foreign Minister of the Australian Parliament and President and Chief Executive of the International Crisis Group Gareth Evans, actor and humanitarian Mia Farrow, and former Chief of the Defence Staff of the Canadian Forces General Rick Hillier debate the pros and cons of humanitarian intervention. Professor of Economics Paul Collier, economist Hernando De Soto, former UN Secretary-General Stephen Lewis, and bestselling author of Dead Aid Dambisa Moyo explore the opportunities and hazards of foreign aid. Former British politician and bestselling author Lord Nigel Lawson, adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School and bestselling author Bjørn Lomborg, environmental activist and Leader of the Green Party of Canada Elizabeth May, and journalist and bestselling author George Monbiot tackle one of the great public policy questions of our time: how should the world respond to climate change? Intelligent, informative, and entertaining, The Munk Debates is a lively forum of ideas and opinions that aims to reinvigorate public discourse and civic dialogue, and captures the prevailing moods, clashing opinions, and most imperative issues of our time.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, NDP leader Thomas Mulcair, and Liberal leader Justin Trudeau squared off on September 28, 2015, in Toronto, for the first-ever federal election debate on Canada's foreign policy. Too often, foreign policy issues have been afterthoughts in federal election campaigns. Now, for the first time, Canadians will have the opportunity to see the three federal party leaders recognized in Parliament defend their foreign policy visions for the country in a nationally televised debate. From the war against terror to Canada-U.S. relations to challenges and opportunities of international trade, the Munk Debate on Canada's Foreign Policy will provide the public with important insights into how our next prime minister will defend and project Canada's interests and values on the global stage.

The fourteenth semi-annual Munk Debate, which will be held in Toronto on November 5, 2014, pits Bret Stephens and Robert Kagan against Fareed Zakaria and Anne-Marie Slaughter to debate the legacy of President Obama. From Ukraine to the Middle East to China, the United States is redefining its role in international affairs. Alliance building, public diplomacy, and eschewing traditional warfare in favour of the focused use of hard power such as drones and special forces are all hallmarks of the so-called Obama Doctrine. Is this a farsighted foreign policy for the United States and the world in the twenty-first century - one that acknowledges and embraces the increasing diffusion of power among states and non-state actors? Or, is an America "leading from behind" a boon for the nations and blocs who want to roll back economic globalization, international law, and the spread of democracy and human rights? In this edition of the Munk Debates, Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Bret Stephens and famed historian and foreign policy commentator Robert Kagan square off against CNN's Fareed Zakaria and noted academic and political commentator Anne-Marie Slaughter to debate the legacy of President Obama. With ISIS looking to reshape the Middle East, Russia increasingly at odds with the rest of the West, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at a standstill, the Munk Debate on Foreign Policy asks, has Obama's foreign policy taken the U.S. in the right direction?

The twenty-sixth semi-annual Munk Debate, North America's premier public-policy event. Held semi-annually, the Munk Debates provide leading thinkers with a global forum to discuss the major public-policy issues facing the world. Participants in the Munk Debates have included Tony Blair, Stephen Fry, Newt Gingrich, Malcolm Gladwell, Christopher Hitchens, Garry Kasparov, Henry Kissinger, Paul Krugman, Steven Pinker, Samantha Power, and Fareed Zakaria. The Munk Debate series features the full text of the debates, along with interviews with the debaters in which they delve more deeply into the issues affecting all of us today. The twenty-sixth debate will be held on May 28, 2020, with the debaters and topic announced online in March 2020 at munkdebates.com.

Throughout the Western world, politics is undergoing a sea-change. Long-held notions of the role of government, trade and economic policy, foreign policy, and immigration are being challenged by populist thinkers and movements. Does this surging populist agenda in Western nations signal a permanent shift in our politics? Or is it a passing phenomenon that will remain at the fringes of society and political power? Will our politics continue to be shaped by the post-war consensus on trade, inclusive national identity, and globalization, or by the agenda of insurgent populist politics, parties, and leaders? The twenty-third semi-annual Munk Debate pits former Donald Trump advisor Stephen K. Bannon against columnist and public intellectual David Frum to debate the future of the liberal political order.

In Western societies, the capitalist system is facing a level of distrust not seen in decades. Economic inequality is rampant. Life expectancy is falling. The environment is being destroyed for profit. Political power is wielded by wealthy elites and big business. For capitalism's critics, it is clear that the system is not designed to help average people. Their solution is a top-to-bottom reform of the "free market" along more socialist and democratic lines. For proponents of capitalism, however, this system has been the greatest engine of economic and social progress in history. Not only has capitalism made all of us materially better off, its ideals are responsible for everything from women's rights to a cleaner environment to political freedoms. The answer to society's current ills is more capitalism, more economic freedom, and more free markets. The twenty-fifth semi-annual Munk Debate, held on December 4, 2019, pits editorial director and publisher of the Nation Katrina vanden Heuvel and former finance minister of Greece Yanis Varoufakis against Harvard professor Arthur C. Brooks and New York Times columnist David Brooks to debate whether the capitalist system is broken.

It is the public debate of the moment: is Donald Trump precipitating a crisis of American democracy? For some the answer is an emphatic "yes." Trump's disregard for the institutions and political norms of U.S. democracy is imperiling the Republic. The sooner his presidency collapses the sooner the healing can begin and the ship of state righted. For others Trump is not the villain in this drama. Rather, his young presidency is the conduit, not the cause, of Americans' deep-seated anger towards a privileged and self-dealing Washington elite. Trump's disruption of politics as usual is what America needs to start the process of restoring democracy by the people, for the people. The twenty-first semi-annual Munk Debate, held on October 12th, 2017, pits award-winning journalist E. J. Dionne, Jr. and influential author and blogger Andrew Sullivan against former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Newt Gingrich and bestselling author and editor Kimberley Strassel to debate the current crisis of American democracy.

How should the West deal with Putin's Russia? For the U.S. and some European powers the answer is obvious: isolate Russia with punishing economic sanctions, remove it from global institutions such as the G8, and arm the nations directly threatened by Putin. In short, return to the Cold War doctrine that froze Soviet aggression in Europe and helped bring about the collapse of communist Russia. Others argue that such a policy is a dead end. Putin's Russia has legitimate grievances against Western and NATO powers meddling in its sphere of influence. Instead of further antagonizing Putin and risking a dangerous escalation of the current conflict, the U.S. and Europe should seek common cause with Russia to address shared threats, from the Middle East to Asia to combatting terrorism. In the fifteenth semi-annual Munk Debate, acclaimed academic Stephen F. Cohen and veteran journalist and bestselling author Vladimir Poznar square off against internationally renowned expert on Russian history Anne Applebaum and Russian-born political dissident Garry Kasparov to debate the future of the West's relationship with Russia.

The world is facing the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War. Over 300,000 are dead in Syria, and one and half million are either injured or disabled. Four and a half million people are trying to flee the country. And Syria is just one of a growing number of failed or failing states in the Middle East and North Africa. How should developed nations respond to human suffering on this mass scale? Do the prosperous societies of the West, including Canada and the U.S., have a moral imperative to assist as many refugees as they reasonably and responsibly can? Or, is this a time for vigilance and restraint in the face of a wave of mass migration that risks upending the tolerance and openness of the West? The eighteenth semi-annual Munk Debate, which was held on April 1, 2016, pits former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour and leading historian Simon Schama against leader of the UK Independence Party Nigel Farage and bestselling author Mark Steyn to debate the West's response to the global refugee crisis.

Does government surveillance make us safer? The thirteenth Munk Debate, held in Toronto on Friday, May 2, 2014, pitted Michael Hayden and Alan Dershowitz against Glenn Greenwald and Alexis Ohanian to debate whether state surveillance is a legitimate defense of our freedom the democratic issue of the moment. In a risk-filled world, democracies are increasingly turning to large-scale state surveillance, at home and abroad, to fight complex and unconventional threats but is it justified? For some, the threats more than justify the current surveillance system, and the laws and institutions of democracies are more than capable of balancing the needs of individual privacy with collective security. But for others, we are in peril of sacrificing to a vast and unaccountable state surveillance apparatus the civil liberties that guarantee citizens basic freedoms and our democratic way of life. In this edition of the Munk Debates, former head of the CIA and NSA Michael Hayden and civil liberties lawyer Alan Dershowitz square off against journalist Glenn Greenwald and Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian to debate the legitimacy of state surveillance. With issues of Internet privacy increasingly gaining prominence, the Munk Debate on the Surveillance State asks: Should government be able to monitor our activities in order to keep us safe?

Is China's rise unstoppable? Powered by the human capital of 1.3 billion citizens, the latest technological advances, and a comparatively efficient system of state-directed capitalism, China seems poised to become the global superpower this century. But the Middle Kingdom also faces a series of challenges. From energy scarcity to environmental degradation to political unrest and growing global security burdens, a host of factors could derail China's global ascent. In this edition of The Munk Debates - Canada's premier international debate series - former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and CNN's Fareed Zakaria square off against leading historian Niall Ferguson and world-renowned economist David Daokui Li to debate the biggest geopolitical issue of our time: Does the 21st century belong to China? Highly electrifying and thoroughly engrossing, the Munk Debate on China is the first formal public debate Dr. Kissinger has participated in on China's future, and includes exclusive interviews with Henry Kissinger and David Daokui Li.

Be it resolved, the liberal international order is over…Since the end of World War II, global affairs have been shaped by three broad trends: the increasing free movement of people and goods, international rules setting, and a broad appreciation of the mutual benefits of a more interconnected, interdependent world. Together these factors defined the liberal international order and sustained an era of rising global prosperity and declining international conflict. But is this order now being supplanted by a new global reality; one defined by the assertion of national borders, national interests and protectionist trade polices? More fundamentally, is liberal internationalism a historical aberration; the product of a unique set of forces that are now in retreat? Or, can it survive these challenges and remain the defining rules-based system of the future? The twentieth semi-annual Munk Debate, held on April 28th, 2017, pits prominent historian Niall Ferguson against CNN's Fareed Zakaria to debate the future of liberal internationalism.

Progress. It is one of the animating concepts of the modern era. From the Enlightenment onwards, the West has had an enduring belief that through the evolution of institutions, innovations, and ideas, the human condition is improving. This process is supposedly accelerating as new technologies, individual freedoms, and the spread of global norms empower individuals and societies around the world. But is progress inevitable? Its critics argue that human civilization has become different, not better, over the last two and a half centuries. What is seen as a breakthrough or innovation in one period becomes a setback or limitation in another. In short, progress is an ideology, not a fact; a way of thinking about the world as opposed to a description of reality. In the seventeenth semi-annual Munk Debates, which was held in Toronto on November 6, 2015, pioneering cognitive scientist Steven Pinker and bestselling author Matt Ridley squared off against noted philosopher Alain de Botton and bestselling author Malcolm Gladwell to debate whether humankind's best days lie ahead.

Increasingly in the West, China is being characterized as a threat to the liberal international order, one that must be overcome through economic, political, technological, and even military means. For those who believe that the policies of the Chinese Communist Party pose a threat to free and open societies, the U.S. and like-minded nations must band together to preserve a rules-based international order. For others, this approach spells disaster; it ignores the history and dynamics propelling China's rise to superpower status. Rather than threatening the post-war order, China is its best, and maybe only, guarantor in an era of declining U.S. leadership, increased regional instability, and slowing global growth. The twenty-fourth semi-annual Munk Debate, held on May 9, 2019, pits former Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs H. R. McMaster and director for Chinese strategy at the D.C.-based Hudson Institute think tank Michael Pillsbury against former President of the United Nations Security Council Kishore Mahbubani and president of one of China's top independent think tanks, the Center for China Globalization, Huiyao Wang to debate the threat of China to the liberal international order.

As middle-class incomes stagnate in advanced economies while the rich experience record income gains, the eleventh semi-annual Munk Debate pits wealth redistribution supporters Paul Krugman and George Papandreou against Newt Gingrich and Arthur Laffer to debate taxation - should the rich pay more? For some the answer is obvious: redistribute the wealth of the top income earners who have enjoyed, for almost a generation, the lion's share of all income gains. Imposing higher taxes on the wealthy is the best way for countries such as Canada to reinvest in their social safety nets, education, and infrastructure while protecting the middle class. Others argue that anemic economic growth, not income inequality, is the real problem facing advanced countries. In a globalized economy, raising taxes on society's wealth creators leads to capital flight, falling government revenues, and less money for the poor. These same voices contend that lowering taxes on everyone stimulates innovation and investment, fuelling future prosperity. In this edition of the Munk Debates - Canada's premier international debate series - Nobel Prize–winning economist Paul Krugman and former Prime Minster of Greece George Papandreou square off against former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Newt Gingrich and famed economist Arthur Laffer to debate if the rich should bear the brunt of higher taxes. For the first time ever, this stimulating debate, which will take place in front of a sold-out audience, will be available in print. With advanced countries facing overextended social services, crumbling infrastructure, and sluggish economic growth, the Munk Debate on economic inequality tackles the essential public policy issue: Should we tax the rich more?

With tensions between Iran, Israel, and Western powers reaching new highs over the Islamic Republics nuclear enrichment program, the tenth edition of the Munk Debates investigates how the world should respond to Iran's nuclear ambitions. For some, the case for a pre-emptive strike on Iran is ironclad. An Iranian bomb would flood the volatile Middle East with nuclear weapons and trap Israel in a state of perilous insecurity along with much of the world's oil supply. Others argue that a nuclear Iran could be the very stabilizing force that the region needs, as the threat of nuclear war makes conventional conflicts more risky. These same voices also ask: can the West and Israel afford to attack Iran when doing so could roll back the Arab Spring and re-entrench reactionary forces throughout the Middle East? In this edition of the Munk Debates Canada's premier international debate series former Israel Defense Forces head of military intelligence Amos Yadlin, Pulitzer Prizewinning political commentator Charles Krauthammer, CNN host Fareed Zakaria, and Iranian-born academic Vali Nasr debate the consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran. For the first time ever, this electrifying debate, which played to a sold-out audience, is now available in print, along with candid interviews with the debaters. With tempers flaring between governments, the world's oil supply in peril, and global security at risk, the Munk Debate on Iran tries to answer: Can the world tolerate an Iran with nuclear weapons?

In the sweep of human history, the European Union stands out as one of humankind's most ambitious endeavours. It encompasses half a billion people, twenty-seven member states, twenty-three languages, and an economy valued at over $15 trillion. Modern Europe's stunning achievements aside, its sovereign debt crisis has shaken the world's largest political and economic union to its core. Can the federal institutions and shared values of Europeans meet the challenges of debt crisis that are as much political as economic? Or, are Europe's current woes indicative of a series of deep structural faults that foreshadow the breakup and failure of the European Union? In this edition of the Munk Debates -- Canada's premier international debate series -- former EU Commissioner Lord Peter Mandelson and EU parliament co-president of the Greens/European Free Alliance Group Daniel Cohn-Bendit, German publisher-editor and author Josef Joffe, and renowned economic historian Niall Ferguson debate the future of the EU -- one of the most pressing global issues of our day. For the first time ever, this electrifying debate, which played to a sold-out audience, is now available in print, along with candid interviews with Niall Ferguson and Lord Peter Mandelson. As youth unemployment rates flare, currencies collapse, and political alliances erode, the Munk Debate on Europe tries to answer, has the great European experiment failed?

As stock markets gyrate, Europe lurches from crisis to crisis, and recovery in the United States slows, the future of the North American economy is more uncertain than ever. Can individual entrepreneurship, corporate innovation, and governments create a new era of sustained economic growth? Or, will the ongoing financial crisis, political dysfunction in the United States, and the rise of emerging nations erode living standards in North America for the long term? In this edition of the Munk Debates -- Canada's premier international debate series -- Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman and former Chief Economist at the Bank of America-Merrill Lynch, David Rosenberg, square off against former director of President Obama's National Economic Council, Lawrence Summers, and bestselling author Ian Bremmer to tackle the resolution: Be it resolved North America faces a Japan-style era of high unemployment and slow growth. This riveting debate features four of the world's most renowned economists discussing the single most important issue facing all North Americans in a lively, engaging forum. The economy is a concern that demands our immediate attention and this enlightening and hugely important debate is a must-read for all of us.

For the first time in history, will it be better to be a woman than a man in the upcoming century? The twelfth semi-annual Munk Debate pits Hanna Rosin and Maureen Dowd against Caitlin Moran and Camille Paglia to debate one of the biggest socio-economic phenomena of our time the relative decline of the power and status of men in the workplace, in the family, and society at large. Men have traditionally been the dominant sex. But now, for the first time, a host of indicators suggests that women not only are achieving equality with men, but are fast emerging as the more successful sex of the species. Whether in education, employment, personal health, or child rearing, statistics point to a rise in the status and power of women at home, in the workplace, and in traditional male bastions such as politics. But are men, and the age-old power structures associated with maleness, permanently in decline?