Oxford Debate LIVE: Will Asia's Rise Lead to a New World Order? 

Civilization started in Asia. Asia embraced the rise of the West just fine. Why now when the curve goes back to Asia, there has to be any problem on the West?..

China and South East Asia nations except Pinoy will experience impressive economic performance. The Western involvement of the wars in Europe, and the Middle East will further deteriorate the Western economic performance.

Classic British: Talking about rising without any speaker from India and China or Asia.

After less than a minute into John Lee's opening remarks, I've had to switch off and out. Not sure how and where he's been spending his last 10-15 years but for him to speak of the "First World" still being in commanding lead in tech etc, you know where this discussion is heading when someone is so far out there bathed in delusion or denial.

The WEST are SO AFRAID of asia's rise.... Hahahahhaa

The first speaker possesses critical thinking. She is informed and analyzes information coherently. The second speaker is a high school-level debater. She has no intellectual ability and is unable to connect the dots. The third speaker is a good backup for the first speaker. The last speaker is still living under a rock. He is clueless.

Asia is the future. This is without a doubt. NVIDIA which has an Asian founder shows that asians are just as capable or even surpass whites in innovation and production... Asia will rule omce agian as it has for millenia... Our greatest driver will be tech, the majority of which will have A LOT of asians involved

Chinese increase in the use of robots will help the Chinese to increase productivity and AI will help to accelerate the improvement in future designs

The Chinese send their kids outside the country because their kids are not good enough to compete at home. It is 10 times easier to go to quality school aboard than quality school in China. If you haven't notice that the gold medalist and silver medalist on the math and science olympiads are consistently between the US and China. If you look at the picture between the two team, you can barely recognize which country they represent if it wasn't for the flag behind them.

Learn Chinese Civilisation, Confucianism -Taoism political History and Culture of the pre - colonial era ( two to three thousands years ago) more thoroughly and we will recognise why there's China rejuvenation . The pains of self proclaimed righteousness and racist in the name of White man Burden" colonialism lives on today. To the 88% of the who live outside the Western Bloc, evidently, World Disorder began in the 18th Century when colonialism, White supremacism, slavery, cultural genocide, exploitative capitalism and violence perpetuate ruthless imperialism and political bigotry, Zionism destroy peace, harmony stability and prosperity.

The 2 opponent speakers are arguing just like the US politicians and the Anglo Saxon news medias ie : twist and turn with no fact and even lying.

Remember, divide and rule principle. By the British, it worked for them and it's still being used today.

This is one of the worst debate I have ever seen, the opposing team is absolutely Clueless.

Chinese industrial output will move into high Value engineering products and the Chinese technicians will produce more high value products.. which will make Chinese output the leaders of the World industrial output..

John Lee is still living in the 90s in his head. China has the lead in most technology fields these days.

亞洲與中國現沒有太多和牛津聯繫，俗稱'关你屁事'，自作多情。

😂😂😂 Obviously, a Western Audience. 😂 John & Abigael presentation was so factual and clear while Julia & Lee was basically out of scope and full of irrelevant justification.

The Second Lady speaker: Africa is fast growing and will be more prosperous in future. However, its starting points are too far below Asian countries…….the governing system, living standards, education, infrastructure, tech…….nothing comparable to Asia…….the gap between these two at least 30 years apart.

Greeting from TADETADE BLEND by VINCE KYLam. Thank you so much such an amazing conversation and great profound speaker. TQVM.

colonial order, not international order

This LEE throws around a lot of big terms and names which I doubt he even understood, I'm completely at a loss what he's talking about!

Neither China nor India (and for that matter, Japan, South Korea or Indonesia) has a history of divide and rule or predatory behaviours. This new order is about self determination through trade, investment and peace. Not one of economic and military dominance of US/West while the global south just takes orders, like in the case of IMF and World Bank. Whether this new order is completely new (not likely) or modification of the old (more likely) is academic. It's not about whether China or India leading but that most of the world are unhappy with US/West holding dominant power over the rest of the world.

Kashor Mabubani is a senior singapore diplomatic and well-known academics expert on Asian rising. He said, "Last two hundred years of western domination is aspirations in the two thousand years human history. Rising Asian is returning historical normal.

Debating "Will" not "How"? These guys are seriously out of touch 😂

We Chinese happy to see the West world is addicted to John Lee's opinion. Hope they are keeping statisfy&trust their strength and priority. But we Chinese welcome your visit and discover a real China with your eyes. And we trust communication and used to learn from each other.

China has the "Great Hall of the people" USA has the "Great Hall of the Ultra-Rich"😂😂

Brics countries will be buying made in Russia, china, india ect.

First Q is ridiculous Min39 no mention of the imperialism

One question for Oxford "Is Asia not allowed to rise ?" Try answer this after seriously think about it !

these so call 'oxford debate ' ought to talk about the war crimes of united states over the last 50 years !!! “The United States has carried out 34 percent of its 392 interventions against countries in Latin America and the Caribbean; 23 percent in East Asia and the Pacific region; 14 percent in the Middle East and North Africa; and just 13 percent in Europe and Central Asia, according to a newly refined version of the Military Intervention Project (MIP) dataset - a venture of the Center for Strategic Studies at Tufts University’s Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.” From David Vine’s The United States at War: 1941-1945 World War II (Europe, North Africa, Asia/Pacific) 1946 Trieste 1947-1949 Greece 1948-1949 Berlin, Germany 1950 Formosa (Taiwan) 1950-1953 Korea 1953-1954 Formosa (Taiwan) 1955-1975 Vietnam 1956 Egypt 1958 Lebanon 1962 Cuba 1962 Thailand 1962-1975 Laos 1964 Congo (Zaire) 1965 Dominican Republic 1965-1973 Cambodia 1967 Congo (Zaire) 1976 Korea 1978 Congo (Zaire) 1980 Iran 1981 El Salvador 1981 Libya 1981-1989 Nicaragua 1982-1983 Egypt 1982-1983 Lebanon 1983 Chad 1983 Grenada 1986 Bolivia 1986 Libya 1987-1988 Iran 1988 Panama 1989 Bolivia 1989 Colombia 1989 Libya 1989 Peru 1989 Philippines 1989-1990 Panama 1990 Saudi Arabia 1991 Congo (Zaire) 1991-1992 Kuwait 1991-1993 Iraq 1992-1994 Somalia 1993-1994 Macedonia 1993-1996 Haiti 1993-2005 Bosnia 1995 Serbia 1996 Liberia 1996 Rwanda 1997-2003 Iraq 1998 Afghanistan 1998 Sudan 1999-2000 Kosovo 1999-2000 Montenegro 1999-2000 Serbia 2000 Yemen 2000-2002 East Timor 2000-2016 Colombia 2001 - Afghanistan 2001- Pakistan 2001- Somalia 2002-2015 Philippines 2002- Yemen 2003-2011 Iraq 2004 Haiti c2004- Kenya 2011 Democratic Republic of the Congo 2011-2017 Uganda 2011- Libya c2012- Central African Republic c2012- Mali c2013-2016 South Sudan c2013- Burkina Faso c2013- Chad c2013- Mauritania c2013- Niger c2013- Nigeria 2014 Democratic Republic of the Congo 2014- Iraq 2014- Syria 2015 Democratic Republic of the Congo c2015- Cameroon 2016 Democratic Republic of the Congo 2017- Saudi Arabia c2017 Tunisia 2019- Philippines The supreme international crime according to 2017 U.S. media reporting is interfering nonviolently in a democratic election - at least if Russia does it. William Blum, in his book Rogue State, lists over 30 times that the United States has done that. Another study, however, says 81 elections in 47 countries. France 2017 makes that total at least 82. Honduras 2017 makes it 83. Russia 2018 makes it 84. The 2020-revealed 1964 coup in British Guiana makes it 85. Somalia 2022 would be 86. There are clearly dozens more. In a reality-based assessment of U.S. crimes, the serious offenses begin beyond that threshold. Here’s Blum’s list of over 50 foreign leaders whom the United States has attempted to assassinate: 1949 - Kim Koo, Korean opposition leader 1950s - CIA/Neo-Nazi hit list of more than 200 political figures in West Germany to be “put out of the way” in the event of a Soviet invasion 1950s - Chou En-lai, Prime minister of China, several attempts on his life 1950s, 1962 - Sukarno, President of Indonesia 1951 - Kim Il Sung, Premier of North Korea 1953 - Mohammed Mossadegh, Prime Minister of Iran 1950s (mid) - Claro M. Recto, Philippines opposition leader 1955 - Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of India 1957 - Gamal Abdul Nasser, President of Egypt 1959, 1963, 1969 - Norodom Sihanouk, leader of Cambodia 1960 - Brig. Gen. Abdul Karim Kassem, leader of Iraq 1950s-70s - José Figueres, President of Costa Rica, two attempts on his life 1961 - Francois “Papa Doc” Duvalier, leader of Haiti 1961 - Patrice Lumumba, Prime Minister of the Congo (Zaire) 1961 - Gen. Rafael Trujillo, leader of Dominican Republic 1963 - Ngo Dinh Diem, President of South Vietnam 1960s-70s - Fidel Castro, President of Cuba, many attempts on his life 1960s - Raúl Castro, high official in government of Cuba 1965 - Francisco Caamaño, Dominican Republic opposition leader 1965-6 - Charles de Gaulle, President of France 1967 - Che Guevara, Cuban leader 1970 - Salvador Allende, President of Chile 1970 - Gen. Rene Schneider, Commander-in-Chief of Army, Chile 1970s, 1981 - General Omar Torrijos, leader of Panama 1972 - General Manuel Noriega, Chief of Panama Intelligence 1975 - Mobutu Sese Seko, President of Zaire 1976 - Michael Manley, Prime Minister of Jamaica 1980-1986 - Muammar Qaddafi, leader of Libya, several plots and attempts upon his life 1982 - Ayatollah Khomeini, leader of Iran 1983 - Gen. Ahmed Dlimi, Moroccan Army commander 1983 - Miguel d’Escoto, Foreign Minister of Nicaragua 1984 - The nine comandantes of the Sandinista National Directorate 1985 - Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanese Shiite leader (80 people killed in the attempt) 1991 - Saddam Hussein, leader of Iraq 1993 - Mohamed Farah Aideed, prominent clan leader of Somalia 1998, 2001-2 - Osama bin Laden, leading Islamic militant 1999 - Slobodan Milosevic, President of Yugoslavia 2002 - Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Afghan Islamic leader and warlord 2003 - Saddam Hussein and his two sons 2011 - Muammar Qaddafi, leader of Libya

Four people are involved, three are white and one is Asian, talking about Asian things

Why not? Nothing lasts forever.

Correct l agree with you, the century of the dragon 🐉

I think what lee is all assumption .. he does not understand new technology... He is still think the steam tech... He does not understand the change today... The power is shift is there already...

This squirell in a wheel model pushes to give a single question, what kind of shape will provide rise of gdp. Most advanced studies suggest the regionalization answers that question in comparably satisfaying way for next decades. Comparably.

Chinese Rail system is changing into Nitrogen Maglev which will run at 700 km / hour minimum... thus the Chinese Nitrogen Maglev system will reduce the use of jet engine..

Simple, can one produce just household goods in their countries? Is it competitive ? New world order, is nothing new , just accept what is coming and live happily

Indonesia people are coming up in the consuming market , so are the Indian consumer population....Thai and Vietnamese populations want to improve Their living standard , the CHINESE output will help these nations in ASEAN to achieve their desires..

Why not change the title to "The downfall of the West "?

The first speaker is a ✨ star

Scale: 1945-2012 US with roughly 4% of world population and 25% of world GDP, led 6 % of world population (Euro+Japan +S Korea and others) to prosperity and collective security. China’s model is quite different. It is a skewed developing country, offering assistance to almost anyone (those tempering the One China Policy need not apply).

This is a debatable topic? You can debate how far can Asia rise. Once they are at your level, they would live happily ever after under your command? If their economy is as big as yours, or bigger, if their technology is as advanced as yours, or better, they prefer to have no voice and any affairs?

I would be surprised if the pair who argued in favor of the motion would win in a western educated dominated audience. I would hope that it’s not a case of misplaced confidence for the winning team.

Asia is being discussed but their is no direct Asian representation 😂😂

Is this really an "Asia Society"?

So basically they aren’t arguing that things aren’t moving away from Europe. They’re arguing on where the change would go to… and if it would change the order of the world in general. Both sides…

I think its difficult to replace the western world order aka American world order because all these people of Europe, USA and Australia are one and the same people not just in terms of ethnicity/race but also political system, economy, society, religion etc. One large same chunk of people spread over multiple countries which happened during the colonial period. This sameness is almost non-existent in emerging powers like China, India, Indonesia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, etc. So, Asia will never be united because these countries will put their own interest first rather than collective interest so Asia will be more divided than united. The most likely scenario of the western decline is when immigrants replace white population and indians, chinese, arabs, africans together take over the western political institutions and change them to make the world more equitable and less hegemonic. Israel gaza issue is the perfect example. If non-whites would have been in charge of the white house, Israel would have never been able to do war crimes against the Palestinians.

How many new countries will be formed out of yugosalavia type states in Asia??

JUNGLE is winning against GARDEN 😅 South vs West

It is unrealistic for the USA and its allies to catch up with the global South in terms of production capacity and thereby save their world order for the following reason: the old industrialized countries have outsourced their production capacities to the developing countries. The reason for this was that they wanted to generate the greatest possible profit for shareholders through low wages. As a result, the ruling class has placed itself at the forefront of value creation without letting the population share in the profits. For this reason, the old industrial nations are not producing steel and are closing coal mines. Because their industry is no longer competitive with developing countries due to their strong currencies and high wages. For this reason, Western economies can no longer exploit their production potential. That is why Russia, whose arms budget is ten percent as large as that of the USA, produces five times as much artillery. The ruling class in America and Western Europe wants to save a world order that has created the very problem described above. That is impossible.

The first lady and her partner are well informed and knowledgeable. As an Australian, I believe harmony is much more favorable than warmonger like the US and allies.

Other nations are not developing the future Robots like in China.. especially for Auto production and ships and train productions...

The debate voting results shows those voting lives in a different universe!

How about a bigger international co-operative? I'm thinking, "International" won't be isolated to Asia, or "The West", which really is an archaic concept in itself. Free nations are not limited by their geographic locations as malevolent dictatorships are. We are already expanding beyond ancient regions of "East" and "West."

I would imagine a new world order needs to be seen through multiple lens , not just economic and investment driven growth but also military power, law and order and civil stability within countries. World order would structurally change and reform but not become polarised to any one region anymore unless there are multiple other crisis (Covid like which is not regionalised but has global impact) which forces the shift. Also - China and India both are leading the Asia story however one wouldn’t let the other gain the superior status due to long driving rivalry between the two nations which has a complex and difficult historical geopolitical relationship.

I don’t quite understand their point of view, I have four sample viewpoints: 1. What is Technological innovation？ Transforming new technologies into productivity, and then copy them into everything that we need! 2. China find three important keys Infrastructure New energy and Artificial intelligence 3. China has a complete manufacturing environment 4. Healthy living environment .

Goodness gracious. I have only viewed the first few minutes but where is a Chinese Professor or similar on this panel. Have you people viewed Chinese discussions on world problems, always a good mix of intelligent participants from China, America, India, Singapore Asia generally, sometimes Europeans, etc. For your and your viewers education involve Chinese Professors and Chinese Pundits on these types of debates.

The Thai High Speed train is fully booked for the next Few weeks ... thousands of Chinese are entering Lao for the Thai market daily . .. the Thai is converting their Thai pick up and car productions into electric with Chinese helps . .

The opposition (right side) are talking gibblish , they don't debate to the point, just want to cloud out audience and divert attention ! 😂

Is John Lee from taiwan? 🤔 Just curious.

People are hating on John Lee, but in the argument "Will Asia's rise lead to a New World Order", you HAVE to ask... well, will Asia's rise lead to an end to existing world order: borders, UN, World Bank, SWIFT, WTO, NATO. You also HAVE to establish whether Asia's rise is the catalyst for change in the existing world order, which is why Julia Ganter references a middle powers group that John Lee points to existing since WWII- and I find that convincing.

Julia Ganter's group lost the debate from the beginning because they failed to define what the West Rule Based Order was. Of course, then it is difficult to argue why that order had to be kept and would not be changed. Arbigael's group seized it and immediately pointed the rule based order was actually an U.S. centered order. Julia's group could neither deny it nor defend it.

There already is one emerging. It is Yellen doing the flying.

India grew 8.3% in 2023-24 India build most highways and expressways under nitin gadkari he broke 8 new guiness world records in infrastructure building I see india slowly climbing up the supply chain so ...yeah thats there most indias would choose trump over china 😂

THE LADY OF THE FIRST TEAM TO SPEAK, I LIKE HER LAST WORDS "WE CAN LIVE IN THAT WORLD OR LIVE IN DENIAL" AH! ALELUAH!!

It will depend on the Future sales of C919 and C929 . which will replace Boeing and Airbus

Helov muy buenos días exelenticimos panelistas mi history es gue yo me integre con unos vacacionistas en Canadá y ellos eran chinos y coreanos

Apple 🍎 iPhone is getting BEIDOU AI into their Next iPhone

The world learned not to put your apples in one basket. It is crucial for Foreign investment and supply must be diversified not only in China but should be spread out to balance the distribution of wealth. This way, it's good for the world and we can call it the real order "globalization".

Por eso creo gue estaba bien porgue me hubieran gestionado para poderme sensurarde dónde proviene ese dinero porgue creo Güemes podían apresar sinoles averiguo de dónde proviene ese dinero y Melo decomisaron siyonoled dieran explicaciones

Soooooooooooooooooo ..............What does it mean by "the World Order?" In this sense, I like Prof. John Delury's approach to the motion, even though I arrive at a different answer to the question.

First speaker: Yes, Asia's (B's) rise will diminish the west's （A's) influence. Second speaker, Yes, but C's rise will help B to diminish A's influence. Third speaker, second speaker's points are kind of irrelevant to the debate. The current unipolar world order is already going down hill. Fourth speaker, Asia's rise is already creating a new world order which will actually rebalance - reshift current world order. Are the first-third speakers and the second-forth speakers in agreement or against each other?

He made sure he didn't mention Russian though Chinese are involved, meanwhile the only country that's clearly breaking down the so called unipolar World order right now we know in the physical status is Russian federation is 😅😅😅

I am disappointed to see Asia Society/Oxford had such low level (almost to a point of naive and ignorant) debate, especially on the opposition side and that John Lee is just a total loser

Believe we are up to our necks on Asia rise or otherwise. Let's have on West rise, decline or otherwise. What about Africa?

Which country has the volume of consumer population to demand mass output for a New product .???......Only the Chinese .. the Chinese has the consumer population to move New products..

Second speaker needs to go back to school, freshman high school at best.

I do not think Julia and John believe their position. They just have to take that side of the debate because otherwise there is no debate.

Me presenté como un amigo más de ellos entonces ya van mis programado el chino wales

Organizers should use their imagination. They should think of debates regarding issues such as this; We need peace and If the purpose is to have peace, the unification of humanity should be on the agenda. To achieve unification, justice is vital, and to achieve justice, global democratic governance is essential. So, it is vital for Asia and the West to realize their role in bringing about such a world order and changing world anarchy into a new world order.

Ypor eso Canadá entro en ese proyecto porgue ayi me Registraron para tomarme las primeras criptón monedas y ayi se distribuyó las primeras criptón monedas

Apple cannot develope AI systems for electric cars nor for future iPhone for satellite communication...so Apple 🍎 is negotiating to use Chinese Beidou AI for Future Apple 🍎 iPhone production...

John Lee was the greates debater. Well done!

Here too early. Where is the comments?

judging from the opening statements from both sides , the one against have ALREADY lost the debate

For 40 years time, each year 140.000 chinese students have been getting masters, phd educations from reknown USA ivy leauge universities with full bursary from USA bursary service. From Turkey only 20.000 extreme successful alumnis have been getting bursaries from american normal universities, not from ivy leauge universities like Mit, Harvard, Wharton, Carnegie Mellon, UCLA, University of Southern California, Boston University, Stern nyu, Penn State , Urbana Champagne İllinois State , Stanford univ. etc. İvy leauge ones.

I'm curious why it was called Oxford Debate. I might not have watched it otherwise but glad that I did. With wars being played out in Ukraine and Middle East and possibly with serious consequences for the world, I would be brave and foolish to think I could even hazard to guess the winners. The global order we are accustomed to can unravel. America's role as global policeman of the world end. Asia's rise would then be meaningless. It seems more likely that an uneasy peace amidst smouldering wars will define the period going forward. Catestrophic change will then come from unpredictable black swan event(s).

These are suppose to be experts but I do not see any expertise in here. China is tanking as we speak but both the sides are clueless! This is really pathetic to put it mildly!

One does not have to be a rocket scientist to see through the wishful thinking of those debating against the proposition. They cannot imagine the western world - except the US - taking a back seat in the next decade!!

nonasians talk about what kind of lifes, issues and their norms people in asia should behave, live and aspirate according to white people. the panel reflects that. do these so called young experts know what people in asia need, desire, want and live about their daily life? probably not!

Y de ayi salieron del Canadá ysde fueron a asentar en india ayi también me donaban desde ayinose cuánto pero ellos comenzaron a meter sbicomnes y me decían donando monedas ende criptón y desde ayi se acresento todas las criptón y se Rego entodo el mundo porgue tardes pues conocí a anbeshi hain y con ellos me presenté yme correspondían y les dije gue programaban para bicompero nose dime segian abonando. Pero iba cresiendo la cantidad

Its like asking Chinese students are "Europeans" all bent on "sustainability"?

The concept of “world order” is Eurocentric; it was most relevant when European nations colonized much of the world and fought among each other. Asian countries, on the other hand, do not share the sentiments of Europeans (and their descendants, including the US). Asians are more harmonious, family-oriented, and less direct. The debate on “Will Asia's Rise Lead to a New World Order?” is an oxymoron. The words “Asia rise” and “New World Oder” contradict each other. Perhaps a better debate is whether “Will Asia’s rise lead to a more peaceful and prosperous world than the status quo?”

Why is the BRI being seen as an expansion of her ideology? Isn't it just economic development? This simply shows how the West likes to see China's policy as exporting her way of governance to the poor developing nations just because it is not able to compete with China's industrialization and development programs. India really is struggling to set up a fairer society within her population.

That Caucasian woman keeps talking on behalf of Africa. I wonder what gives her that authority to speak on my behalf. I wonder what gives any Caucasian the right to talk on behalf of Africans.

I question the authenticity and understanding of Asia from the above panel of "Asian experts".

Cyclicity is the rule of the game of rise and falls of nations. Rest are all noise.

Pero comencé a usarlo porgue el presidente lo programo para todos los ciudadanos Demi país

One only has to google and compare the respective GDP (PPP) numbers over the past decade to learn that China's productive force and 'socialist market economy' is proving to be more successful than America's 'free market system'. Moreover, socialism with Chinese characteristics is also demonstrating that it has distinct production and supply chain advantages over a relatively cumbersome privately owned profit driven Military Industrial Complex (MIC) of NATO+ countries. China by comparison, having rapidly developed a state owned purpose driven MIC can now be more confident than most other nation states about defending its borders and people. If Americans are going to be serious about MAGA, they will need to replace their somewhat dated profit driven socio-economic form of governance and MIC with more sophisticated forms; forms that could be achieved within a socialism with American characteristics.

Julia forgets that Africa and Brazil are looking to China for leadership in economic, infrastructure and technology development. In other words the rise in Asia, in particular China has brought the rise in Africa and Brazil. Not the other way round. She is amateurish in understanding of world's trends and the direction the world is going. John Lee, well, what can I say. A person who doesn't seem to read or get his facts right about technology and geopolitical realities centred around China. He is totally detached from reality. Amazing how a person like him can be a consultant for the future as he can't even get the present right. Good grief.