This study presents an in-depth comparative analysis of foreign language education in two distinct regions: the Kurdish and Mekong Delta areas. Harnessing data from reputable databases, including ERIC, JSTOR, Google Scholar, and Scopus, this literature review aimed to shed light on the multifaceted aspects influencing language education in these regions. The study’s purpose was to identify prevailing trends, the infusion of technology in pedagogy, and the resulting outcomes from such educational strategies. In terms of scope, the study cast a wide net, encompassing pedagogical methodologies, challenges faced, perceptions held by students, and the ramifications of educational policies in place. Furthermore, it delved into the realm of teacher training and preparation, pinpointing key differences and similarities in the two regions. From the amassed data, salient findings emerged. Both regions displayed an inclination towards student-centric teaching paradigms. However, the Mekong Delta was identified as being at the forefront of embracing technological advancements and leaning more heavily on standardized testing protocols. In contrast, the Kurdish region intertwined traditional teaching methodologies with newer, innovative strategies. On the challenge front, the Kurdish region grappled with the ramifications of political unrest, while the Mekong Delta battled issues stemming from infrastructural deficits. A striking commonality was unearthed regarding student perceptions. Irrespective of regional differences, students in both locales perceived foreign language acquisition as a pivotal tool — a means to unlock enhanced employment opportunities and foster a deeper cultural comprehension. As the study drew to a close, it carved out actionable insights for a spectrum of audiences, from teachers and policymakers to vested stakeholders. The crux of the findings advocated for the crafting of language education strategies that are finely tuned to regional nuances and challenges. However, the study was not without its limitations. Predominantly, these revolved around the potential for literature biases and the limitations inherent in the chosen scope. These very constraints, though, present fertile ground for future research, beckoning for more granular studies and diversification in research methods to offer a more comprehensive understanding of the topic at hand.