Commissioned Book Review: Henelito A. Sevilla Jr (ed), Philippine-Iran Relations 50 Years
| Published date | 01 May 2022 |
| Date | 01 May 2022 |
| Author | Gabriel Honrada,Daniyal Ranjbar |
| DOI | 10.1177/14789299211007991 |
| Subject Matter | Commissioned Book Review |
Political Studies Review
2022, Vol. 20(2) NP9 –NP10
journals.sagepub.com/home/psrev
Commissioned Book Review
1007991PSW0010.1177/14789299211007991Political Studies ReviewCommissioned Book Review
book-review2021
Commissioned Book Review
Philippine-Iran Relations 50 Years and
Beyond by Henelito A. Sevilla Jr (ed).
Diliman: Asian Centre, University of the
Philippines, 2017. 167pp., Free (Online), ISBN
9789718992210
Philippine-Iran Relations: 50 Years and
Beyond (2017) is a collection of works pre-
sented at an international conference of the
same title at the University of the Philippines
on 20 February 2015. The book provides an
overview of Philippines-Iran bilateral relations
from 1964 to 2014, focusing on political, eco-
nomic, cultural, and people-to-people ties.
The book does not have a central argument.
Rather, it provides a kaleidoscope view of
Philippine-Iran relations. It endeavours the
reader to create their own mental picture of this
relationship. Most entries have the same or
overlapping themes and ideas, thus the chal-
lenge is to identify each author’s unique contri-
bution. That said, the book endeavours readers
to create their own mental image of Philippine-
Iran relations.
A repeated theme in the book is the idea
that misperceptions fuelled by the United
States and international media shape unfavour-
able Filipino perceptions of Iran. Arguably,
Philippine perceptions towards Iran are the
largest obstacle in building bilateral ties.
Philippine policymakers presumed that if they
forgo relations with countries that the United
States has conflicts with, the Philippines will
receive favourable US treatment. As a result,
the Philippines has lost a lot of opportunities
with Iran. This also implies a lack of independ-
ent vision for the Philippines, whose ruling
elites have long relied on US good graces to
stay in power. Despite this, Philippines-Iran
relations endured despite the 1979 Islamic
Revolution and 1986 People Power Revolution.
The reason for this both countries are making
efforts to diversify their foreign relations. The
Philippines aims to find an alternative market
and energy supplier, while Iran seeks energy
markets and international partners to escape
isolation and sanctions.
The book also makes several comparisons
between the 1979 Islamic Revolution and 1986
People Power Revolutions. However, it simply
lists the common themes running through both
revolutions, such as foreign intervention, mod-
ernisation, economy, authoritarianism, and
religious leadership. It would have been bene-
ficial to compare the two revolutions using a
theoretical framework. One possible theory is
elite contestation and disillusionment, wherein
revolutions are assumed to stem from disem-
powered elites seeking to reclaim privileged
status. In Iran, it was the religious elite disen-
franchised by the Shah’s modernisation
reforms; in the Philippines, it was the tradi-
tional elite displaced by the Marcos regime’s
attempts to create its crony network. From a
more idealistic perspective, both revolutions
can be viewed as subject to ‘saving interpreta-
tions’ to keep the core values expressed in
them relevant. Keeping the enduring values
expressed in both revolutions serves to
strengthen both countries’ national narratives,
and to address the growing concern of disinfor-
mation and historical revisionism in their
respective information environments.
Moreover, a recurring theme in the book is
that Iran has a long history, rich culture, and tra-
ditions that make it a cultural powerhouse.
However, one observation is that civilisation-
states such as Russia, China, and Iran are rela-
tively weak in cultural exports and soft power,
even if they have large reserves of cultural
material. Civilisation-states have a strong ten-
dency towards particularism, viewing them-
selves as a bounded political community that
can only be judged through their own history
and internal culture. That said, the concepts
forming the national narratives of civilisation-
states are so tightly interwoven with each other,
that separating concepts from the rest of the
narrative is not feasible. In the case of Iran, its
development as a civilisation-state means that
exporting certain aspects of its culture is chal-
lenging, in the sense that they do not lend them-
selves readily to re-interpretation in another
worldview such as that of the Philippines.
To continue reading
Request your trial