Could Esperanto have a role to play in this situation, and if so, how? Iran is the Muslim country in the region which has been most influenced by Esperanto. Therefore, if Esperanto is to have a chance of beneficially influencing the region, it may be through Esperanto-speaking iranians. What is your opinion about the potential influence for good of Iranian Esperantists in the region?

I reckon that a major factor is the Israeli/Palestinian controversy; it might be that without that situation being cleared up, it'll be harder for peace-supporting Iranians to change the situation much (of course, any support for peace in that region is a bonus, through esperanto or not). For Esperanto to be useful in this situation, I think there needs to be a strong linkage and pan-cultural dissolution within Esperantists in the region, and that the said dissolution of cultural differences needs to spread. I'm studying Indonesian history at university, and one interesting factor about the region is that it was in no sense united by any way until it became a collective Dutch territory, and liberated for want of a better word by the Japanese imperial army. Surely a peaceful movement could have the same effect in the Middle East, and hopefully unify the region and make them focus on similarities and treat cultural differences as a regional quirk rather than a cause of conflict; sort of like greater Europe. Otherwise I fear the middle-east situation could spiral out of control, and end up at the mercy of Europe, Russia, China, and whoever else is next door with money.

Speaking of this topic, this reminded me of something by Nizar Habash, called "Palisra" (clicking on the linked image down lower on the page, which looks like some arabic/hebrew writing, will load up the rather snazzy looking neutralised alphabet he's got, and somewhat complex looking preview dictionary for his "Hebrew/Arabic Esperanto" Semitish (I suspect that this language is still being worked on by him). (I sent him an email on things like grammar, as you can probably suspect I can't help but find it very interesting ).

I fear that the problems in the middle east are bigger and much deeper that language barriers. While it is true that there are a good number of Iranian esperantists, they have not fared very well even in their own country. There were thousands of Esperanto speaking Baha'i that were imprisoned, tortured, or simply disappeared under the rule of the Shah in their own country. Esperanto brings with it the ideals of peace and cooperative living, but in the end, people are still people, and they will fight no matter what language they speak.

What if the Republicans and the Nationalists in Northern Ireland could all speak the same language, so they could talk to each other about their problems and solve their issues?

Oh, wait...

I think that Esperanto would do absolutely nothing to help the problems in the Middle East. The conflicts in the Middle East are not only divided between those who speak different languages (Arabic/Farsi/Hebrew) but also those who speak the same languages, even if it's different variants (Arabic in all of its incarnations).

I think that getting people together on a neutral ground and having citizens meet one another can be a good basis for reducing hostility between populations; this neutral ground could be something like Esperanto, but it could also be sports, food, or any group activity. But that does nothing to resolve conflicts between governments.

What the middle east needs is an enlightenment. They're all locked up in dark-ages style religious zealotry, which is easily manipulated by warlords and dictators. If learning Esperanto helps people in the region to value the pursuit of knowledge, as it should, then it would be a positive contributing factor. What we need is more knowledge in Esperanto, so that people stand to gain more access to things by learning it.

erinja:What if the Republicans and the Nationalists in Northern Ireland could all speak the same language, so they could talk to each other about their problems and solve their issues?

Oh, wait...

I think that Esperanto would do absolutely nothing to help the problems in the Middle East. The conflicts in the Middle East are not only divided between those who speak different languages (Arabic/Farsi/Hebrew) but also those who speak the same languages, even if it's different variants (Arabic in all of its incarnations).

I think that getting people together on a neutral ground and having citizens meet one another can be a good basis for reducing hostility between populations; this neutral ground could be something like Esperanto, but it could also be sports, food, or any group activity. But that does nothing to resolve conflicts between governments.

I agree with you.

Furthermore, politicians and corporations often use ethnic/cultural/linguistic differences as a front to justify conflicts that are in fact motivated by private interests, leading most people to mistakenly believe that those differences are the main driver of conflict.

Uvi:
Furthermore, politicians and corporations often use ethnic/cultural/linguistic differences as a front to justify conflicts that are in fact motivated by private interests, leading most people to mistakenly believe that those differences are the main driver of conflict.

I agree except for specifically pointing the finger at politicians and corporations. Using perceived differences to justify conflict and personal gain is a human tendency. It's not limited to politicians and/or corporations.

This may indicate the wisdom of Zamenhof in wishing the interna ideo to not be separated from the language. The interna ideo may be an essential part of Esperanto if it is to exert an influence for peace.

36lima:

Uvi:
Furthermore, politicians and corporations often use ethnic/cultural/linguistic differences as a front to justify conflicts that are in fact motivated by private interests, leading most people to mistakenly believe that those differences are the main driver of conflict.

I agree except for specifically pointing the finger at politicians and corporations. Using perceived differences to justify conflict and personal gain is a human tendency. It's not limited to politicians and/or corporations.

Hmm, interesting nuance. Thanks.

erinja:What if the Republicans and the Nationalists in Northern Ireland could all speak the same language, so they could talk to each other about their problems and solve their issues?

Last time I checked the Republicans were the Nationalists...

What is interesting, but perhaps not germane, is that although they do have English in common, they are also promoting distinguishing languages independently: Gaeilge for the Nationalists and Ulster-Scots for the Unionists.