The History And Evolution Of Saarc Politics Essay

The History And Evolution Of Saarc Politics Essay The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) comprises eight countries of South Asia, i.e. Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka. The idea of regional cooperation in South Asia was first mooted in May 1980 by Bangladesh President Ziaur Rahman. President Rahman addressed letters to the Heads of Government of the countries of South Asia, presenting his vision for the future of the region and the compelling arguments for regional cooperation in the context of evolving international realities. The Foreign Secretaries of seven countries in South Asia met for the first time in Colombo in April 1981 and identified five broad areas for regional cooperation. A series of meetings followed in Nepal (Kathmandu/November 1981), Pakistan (Islamabad/August, 1982), Bangladesh, India (Delhi/July 1983) to enhance regional cooperation. The next step of this process was the Foreign Ministers meeting in New Delhi in 1983 where they adopted the Declara tion on South Asian Regional Cooperation (SARC). During the next two years South Asian nations committed themselves to form this South Asian alliance and the process culminated in the First SAARC Summit held on 7-8 December in 1985 in Dhaka where the Heads of State or Government of seven countries, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka adopted the Charter formally establishing the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). It is an Association based on the consciousness that in an increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity are best achieved in the South Asian region by fostering mutual understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation among the Member States which are bound by ties of history and culture The objectives and principles contained in the SAARC Charter are as follows: Objectives a) To promote the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and to improve their quality of life; b) To accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region and to provide all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realise their full potential c) To promote and strengthen collective self-reliance among the countries of South Asia; d) To contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciation of one anothers problems; d) To promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social, cultural, technical and scientific fields e) To strengthen cooperation with other developing countries; f) To strengthen cooperation among themselves in international forums on matters of common interests; and g) To cooperate with international and regional organisations with similar aims and purposes. Principles a) Cooperation within the framework of the Association is based on respect for the principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, political independence, non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and mutual benefit; b) Such cooperation is to complement and not to substitute bilateral or multilateral cooperation; and c) Such cooperation should be consistent with bilateral and multilateral obligations of Member States. Preamble to the SAARC Charter The preamble to the SAARC Charter spells out the intention of forming this South Asian alliance as We, the Heads of State or Government of BANGLADESH, BHUTAN, INDIA, MALDIVES, NEPAL, PAKISTAN and SRI LANKA; Desirous of promoting peace, stability, amity and progress in the region through strict adherence to the principles of the UNITED NATIONS CHARTER and NON-ALIGNMENT, particularly respect for the principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, national independence, non-use of force and non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and peaceful settlement of all disputes Conscious that in an increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity are best achieved in the SOUTH ASIAN region by fostering mutual understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation among the Member States which are bound by ties of history and culture Aware of the common problems, interests and aspirations of the peoples of SOUTH ASIA and the need for joint action and enhanced cooperation within their respective political and economic systems and cultural traditions' Convinced that regional cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA is mutually beneficial, desirable and necessary for promoting the welfare and improving the quality of life of the peoples of the region; Convinced further that economic, social and technical cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA would contribute significantly to national and collective self-reliance; Recognising that increased cooperation, contacts and exchanges among the countries of the region will contribute to the promotion of friendship and understanding among their peoples; Do hereby agree to establish an organization to be known as SOUTH ASIAN ASSOCIATION FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION hereinafter referred to as the ASSOCIATIONà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Changes in SAARC over a period of time After more than two decades since its founding at the initiative of General Zia-ul -Rahman, the then President of Bangladesh, the number of members is being increased from seven to eight. And for the first time a member with no common border with India Afghanistan joined SAARC. Also China, Japan, US, South Korea and the European Union attended the Summit as observers. It is only logical that in the not very distant future Russia too will be added to the list of observers. SAARC was conceived as an organisation to promote regional economic and technological cooperation. It was expected that such cooperation, if it is sustained will lead to increased political and security cooperation. Both in the case of European Union and ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) the countries concerned had a shared perception of their security challenges.  This did not happen in case of SAARC. There was a war between two members of the SAARC in 1999 and a military confrontation in 2002. Therefore nurturing SAARC as a regional organisation has been a far more challenging task than those faced by organisations like the European Union and the ASEAN. In fact one member of SAARC (Pakistan) refuses to extend the normal most favoured nation treatment to its neighbour (India) though this is a basic prerequisite under the World Trade Organisation regulations. Though there has been a formal agreement to convert the SAARC region into a free trade area, Pakistan and Bangladesh have been reluctant to move towards the fulfillment of that objective. In reality SAARC is largely a name board with annual rituals, not always regularly observed. While in other parts of the world, the trend is towards countries coming together to form larger markets, in South Asia this sentiment prevails only among Sri Lanka, Bhutan and India. Pakistan and Bangladesh do not contribute to the world-wide wisdom that countries coming together to form larger markets is a mutually beneficially proposition.  Ã‚   In Europian countries like Germany and France got over their centuries old animosity. This happened when countries like Germany, Italy, Spain discarded their authoritarian regimes and became democracies. In ASEAN too Indonesia and Malaysia concluded peace after years of confrontation. Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia who fought long wars with the US, which was supported by other ASEAN countries have now become economic and political partners of countries which helped to wage war against them. Unfortunately such radical transformation has not taken place in South Asia. There are reasons to believe that underlying this difference in development may be that religion-based identity exercises greater dominance in some countries of South Asia than nationalism-based identity. In admitting a number of successful economic powers as observers to the SAARC, the expectation is that such interaction may help to convert the mindset of the countries which still resist regional economic cooperation and integration in a world which is rapidly globalising. India has attempted to get Bangladesh into a BIMSTECH arrangement consisting of Bangladesh, India, Myanmar and Sri Lanka. Such a change in mindset is a time-consuming process and therefore there should not be exaggerated expectations with the new beginning with entry of Afghanistan into SAARC and five new observers. The future of SAARC appears to be brighter because in the past.   SAARC was buffeted by Cold War tensions and Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh were attempting to exploit the differences between India and China and India and the US. Recent changes in the orientation of US policy and the Washington perception about the need to have a balance of power in Asia and consequent need to enhance Indo-US relations have had a radical impact on Indias relations with China and South East Asia.  Ã‚   Increasingly India is referred to as one of the six balancers of power in the emerging international system. India today has a strategic partnership with Russia, the US and the European Union and a strategic dialogue with China and Japan.  Ã‚   The visits of Premier Wen Jia Bao of China, President Vladamir Putin of Russia, Prime Junichiro Minister Koizumi of Japan and President Bush to India and invitation to India along with China to attend the G-8 summit of advanced industrial powers has helped to transform the situation in the SAARC region towards increasing cooperation.  Ã‚   There is now better realisation that neither India-China nor India-US relations can be exploited by other nations as happened during the Cold War. In the SAARC region democracy is gaining ground. Afghanistan has an elected government for the first time. Recent developments in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal, though yet to result in full blown democracy are moving in a positive direction. In Bhutan monarchy is voluntarily transforming itself into a democracy. Some Pakistani intellectuals argue that the factor that stands in the way of regional cooperation and integration in South Asia is the overwhelming dominance of India which constitutes more than 70 per cent of the population, resources and industrial and agricultural production of the region. It is therefore difficult to compare the evolution of SAARC with that of European Union or ASEAN. In a sense it could be argued that India itself with its multi-culturalism, multilingual, multiethnic and multi religious composition is like a further integrated European Union. Political evolution within India has made it inevitable that India will be federally governed by coalitions of all-India and regional parties with regional autonomy and aspirations fully accommodated. This development is bound to have its impact on the rest of the SAARC region. So will Indias rapid economic development, its aspirations to become a knowledge based society, its secular values and democracy. There were people in Indias neighbourhood who thought Indian unity would not survive. This conviction persuaded them not to invest in the evolution of SAARC over the last two decades. That situation is changing. Though it is unrealistic to expect any immediate radical changes in the attitudes of Pakistan and even Bangladesh towards SAARC there is no doubt that a new era of increasing integration is beginning, because of the forces of globalisation and emergence of an international balance of power. Challenges Opportunities The region is full of challenges and opportunities. South Asia is home to more than 1.5 billion people associated with various racial, lingual and religious groups. Some of the main challenges and problems facing the region include poverty, illiteracy, underdevelopment, terrorism, human trafficking, and racial and ethnic conflicts. Similarly, food and energy crises have also come out as burning issues of the region. In spite of such challenges and problems, South Asia is abundant in human as well as natural resources. When these resources are managed and utilized effectively, the region is sure to make considerable socio-economic progress within a short span of time. The South Asian people have many reasons to be optimistic if we look at the SAARC Charter that has included all the existing realities in the sub-continent, with the countries of different sizes, various levels of socio-economic development, historical legacies between and among the nations of the region. But, when the progress made by SAARC is assessed minutely, we do not find a very encouraging picture in terms of quality of life the people in South Asia. However, SAARC is gradually fostering cooperation among the member states in a wide range of areas. Because of its contributions to promoting peace, good neighbourly relations and bringing about socio-economic transformation in the region, SAARC has become a valuable forum among its member states. As a saying goes: Rome was not built in a day, the regional forum also requires some more time to achieve its goals and objectives.

Major Cultural Sporting Events and It’s Benefits

This essay will evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of Glastonbury Festival to the local community. It will mainly focus on the economic impact on the local community of Glastonbury, Pilton and Mendip but will also examine the social impact of the festival. â€Å"Festivals may be recurrent events (at intervals of a year of more) such as Glastonbury or one-off affairs like the Armada celebrations of 1988. A festival may be over in a day, a weekend or last a fortnight or more. Most festivals include associated activities, even if they a predominately one art form in concept† (Waters, 1989, pp 57). Glastonbury Festival could be described as a multicultural festival, as defined by Wilson and Udall (1982, pp 4-6, cited in Hall, 1992, pp 26) who state that multicultural festivals are, â€Å"festivals representing the cultural materials of many cultures. With few exceptions, audiences tend to be people who are not of the cultures presented. Organisers tend to be academics or eclectic fans of the folk arts with the control of the events likely to be in the hands of a non-profit institution. Glastonbury Festival donates the majority of their profits to charitable causes and attracts a diverse range of different people and cultures, from the folk fan to the raver. Glastonbury Festival for Contemporary Performing Arts was started by the owner of Worthy Farm, Michael Eavis, in 1970 and has continued to grow each year since then, with the 2000 festival attracting in excess of 150,000 people (BBC, 2002). Glastonbury Festival is now one of the most well known festivals in the world â€Å"†¦this festival is now a multi-media, international event†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Avon and Somerset Constabulary, 2002). Hall (1992) highlights some of the benefits to the local community of hosting a festival, he says â€Å"undoubtedly, festivals and programs of special events provide opportunities for communities to expand the markets of existing firms and attract new businesses and commercial interests, and perhaps raise the overall attractiveness of the areas as places to settle. However, â€Å"the nature of impacts varies with the age and status of the event and the size of the community in which it takes place† (Wall and Mitchell, 1989, p132, cited in Hall, 1992, pp 47). An event such as Glastonbury Festival, however, may not attract the type of people or businesses that the local residents would approve of and this could create conflicts within the local community. There is a great deal of support for Glastonbury Festival from the local community who benefit from it in many ways, which will be discussed later on in this essay. The Glastonbury Tourist Information Centre show their support for the festival on their website, â€Å"The town of Glastonbury has gained enormously from its association with the Glastonbury Festival. In particular, PTA groups, Carnival Clubs, playschools, local charities and businesses are among the many organisations that have benefited from its success. Therefore we, as a community, would like to show our support for the festival and thank Michael Eavis for bringing us all such a wonderful event. † (Glastonbury TIC, 2002). However, there are also a number of local residents who are opposed to the festival due to the problems caused by the quantity and quality of those attending. These views will also be discussed later on in this essay by reviewing the minutes of the meeting by Mendip District Council for the 2002 licence application. Glastonbury Festivals Ltd. (GFL) have provided a great deal of information as to how the festival financially benefits the local community. A summary of this information will follow. In total, from January 2000 to December 2000, GFL donated ? 703,158. 97 to various charitable organisations worldwide. Of the total amount, ? 289,613. 72 is donated to local causes. These local causes vary from carnival clubs and schools to various sporting clubs, many of which rely on funding from the festival to continue. A letter to Mendip District Council (2002), in support of the festival, from a local child states, â€Å"†¦we could loose our carnival if he [Michael Eavis] doesn’t do this [Glastonbury Festival], because a lot of carnival clubs go up there to raise money to build their floats that cost thousands to make †¦ and we’ve always had Pilton Pop Festival in the past. Three cheers to Michael Eavis. † Herbert (2001) states that, â€Å"in response to the questionnaire 74 percent of local residents asked say that the festival provides financial funding for local charities and schools†. From the information provided by GFL it can be seen that it is not just through donations that the local community is benefited financially from the festival but also by an increase in business at the time of the festival. A total of 316 local businesses received  £3,308,625. 78, from January 2000 to December 2000, by direct spending from GFL. This level of financial input from GFL is much needed by local firms especially due to their rural location. â€Å"We have a lot of support locally. The economy relies on the festival what with the demise of the agriculture industry. The economic case is very, very strong,† said Mr Eavis (BBC, 2002). It is more than likely that, yet again, many of these local companies rely on the annual spending from GFL. However, it is not only through direct spending from GFL that local businesses benefit. All businesses associated with leisure and tourism benefit from the festival, from accommodation to shops and pubs, the publican from the Crown in Pilton said, â€Å"It was a magnificent boost to trade, with nothing lost, nothing stolen and nothing broken – we didn’t have to close the doors to anyone† (GFL, 2002). In the weeks prior to the festival itself, those actually setting up the festival site use many of these local amenities. A proportion of people who come to the festival, including workers, performers and festival goers, choose not to camp on site and look to local hotels and bed and breakfasts for their accommodation† (GFL, 2002). Shepton Mallet, Glastonbury and Wells Tourist Information Centres all state that all of the accommodation on their books is fully booked at the time of the festival. There are also a number of local residents who open their homes up for paying guests over the festival period. â€Å"As a result of the festival therefore, in excess of ? 250,000 is spent in the local community on accommodation† (GFL, 2002). Local garages also benefit from the number of cars arriving on site at the festival, â€Å"Mendip District Council quotes that there were a total of 57,000 cars in the official and unofficial car parks in 2000. Many of these vehicles would have used local garages for fuel, assuming each car only spent ? 10 this amounts to ? 570,000 spent on fuel† (GFL, 2002). At the 2000 festival GFL directly employed 1600 people, twenty five percent of whom were employed from the local area. â€Å"Over  £347,175 was spent on local employment, this amounted to over 55% of the total monies spent on wages for the 2000 festival† (GFL, 2002). Local business also benefited by having stalls at the 2000 festival, of the 770 stalls at the festival fifteen percent were local businesses. GFL (2002) states that, â€Å"It is our policy to try to accommodate local traders in preference to those coming from further a field. † It is clear to see from the information provided by GFL that they make a considerable effort to involve the local community as much as possible in the festival and a large proportion of the direct spending and donations from the profits go directly to the local community. Glastonbury Festival is a cultural event it can therefore be said that it can help to promote cultural tourism within the local community. Cultural tourism is defined by The World Tourism Organisation (1985, p6, cited in Hall, 1992 pp 23) as â€Å"movements of persons for essentially cultural motivations such as study tours, performing arts and cultural tours, travel to festivals and other cultural events, visits to sites and monuments, travel to study nature, folklore or art and pilgrimages†. As the Festival is such a well-known event it probably promotes tourism even when the festival is not actually on. Those who have heard of the festival may want to visit Glastonbury at other times of the year. GFL are aware of the festival’s ability to promote tourism in the local area, as stated by the Commercial Manager, â€Å"the festival brings a lot of money into the local area, and gives it a boost in tourism† (Commercial Manager of the Glastonbury Festival, 2001, cited in Herbert, 2001). However, Van Harssel (1994, cited in Herbert, 2001) stated that a greater level of tourist activity may cause increased overcrowding and congestion, which in itself affects residents’ daily lives†. An investigation by Herbert in 2001, into community participation in the planning and management of the Glastonbury Festival, shows that one of the major drawbacks recognised by the organisers and residents is traffic congestion. She goes on to say; this can be supported by Murphy (1985) who believes that one of the most frequently stated irritant for the host community residents is congestion amongst the community. Such a massive annual influx of festival-goers into the area will easily cause heavy congestion in such a small rural area. It is obvious that this huge festival will have some kind of negative impact, both economically and socially, to the local area. The main economic drawback of the festival is the cost to the local community of dealing with crime and other associated problems actually outside the festival site and the pressure put on local services such as hospitals and the police. This is confirmed by Mendip District Council (2002) â€Å"The Glastonbury Festival attracts more than 100,000 people every year. It doubles the population of Mendip district and severely stretches the capacity of local services, such as the police, fire and hospitals†. At the 2000 festival a total of 3237 patients were dealt with, 127 of which were referred to local hospitals and the helicopter was used twice (Festival Medical Services, 2000). The festival costs the NHS  £40,000 plus many empty beds in case of emergencies (Mendip District Council, 2002). The Somerset Fire Brigade were called to thirty-four incidents at the 2000 festival (Somerset Fire Brigade, 2000). A report from Avon and Somerset Constabulary (2002), complied for the licence application for the 2002 festival, states that â€Å"it can be reasonably predicted that recorded crime in the Mendip District overall will increase by 30 percent in the financial year 2002/03 if a licence is granted†. This level of increase in crime puts a considerable strain on the local police, especially seeing as a great deal of the crime is actually committed outside of the festival perimeter, â€Å"the car parks and areas immediately outside the perimeter fence are gathering points for organised touts and criminal gangs† (Mendip District Council, 2002). One the major problems for the local police is controlling the huge number of people that turn up at the festival without a ticket in the hope of getting over the fence. Many of these people congregate close to the festival sites and unlicensed raves attended by those who cannot get into the festival cause a considerable amount noise that affects local residents. â€Å"During the 2000 festival 400 vehicles (2000+ people) arrived for an unlicensed off-site rave. Of the 98 noise complaints that Mendip District Council received in the year 2000 from distressed local people, seven complaints related to the official festival; the rest derived from the off-site rave† (Mendip District Council, 2002). The cost of policing the 2000 festival was  £1. 25 million. The festival pays 40 percent; the taxpayers pay the rest causing tremendous drain on police resources (Mendip District Council, 2002). The festival also attracts the travelling community, many of whom then stay in the district and are very difficult to move on. One of the many reports submitted to the licensing board, from Mendip District Council (2002), highlights some of the detrimental effects to the environment caused by the festival. The wildlife, where it still exists, does a general exodus. The festival creates a million gallons of raw sewage, which helps to pollute the River Whitelake. 60,000 cars and coaches come into the district, which with the numerous fires and smoke machines etc help to create a haze like an industrial smog over Pilton. The festival creates 1000 tons of rubbish, very little of which is recycled. From the information that has been examined for this essay, it is rather difficult to determine overall whether the positive impacts of the festival outweigh the drawbacks. It also depends on whom you speak to in the local community with regards to how they feel about the festival. Mendip District Council receive many letters and phone calls from local residents some showing support for the festival and other from residents who are wholly opposed to it. It is clear that GFL make a great deal of effort to donate to local charities and to support local businesses, but it seems that not enough is being done to combat the detrimental effects caused by the festival. As stated by Herbert (2001) in her conclusion, â€Å"in general, more members of the host community agreed that the festival brings more disadvantages to the community than benefits, although this could be improved with the community having greater involvement in the planning and management of the Glastonbury Festival†. The 2001 festival did not go ahead as it was felt by the licensing board and the police that it would not be safe and following the 2000 festival the festival organisers were fined  £6,000 for breaches of the licence conditions (Mendip District Council, 2002). This has meant that the conditions of the licence for the 2002 Glastonbury Festival are much more stringent, with the festival organisers this year stating â€Å"No Ticket, No Festival† (GFL, 2002). The festival organisers are combating the huge problem of the number of people turning up without tickets, which appear to be those who cause the most problems in the local area. There will be stricter controls with regards to stopping those with no ticket getting anywhere near the festival. Off site car parks are proposed with buses running to the festival site for only those with a ticket (GFL, 2002), however, it will not be clear until the festival actually happens as to whether this will be effective, it may just cause more problems within the local area. It is clear from the research undertaken that a great deal of effort has been put into trying to ensure that the problems caused by previous festivals are not repeated. An organisation called Mean Fiddler have taken over the running of the festival, they have experience of managing other large-scale cultural events such as the Reading Festival and Homelands (www. meanfiddler. com, 2002). Hopefully this will help to make Glastonbury 2002 safe and fun and a great deal more pleasant for the local community. If the conditions of the licence are breached this year it is almost certain that Glastonbury Festival will not be allowed to continue, it is therefore up to all of those involved and all of those who support the festival to make sure that it is successful.

Descriptive Essay - Original Writing - 1381 Words

Thankfully, Johnny had passed the test of being able to clean up with the help of Dixie and was able to transfer himself fairly well from the wheelchair to the toilet. With a long list of instructions, a bagful of medications and a schedule of appointments for therapy and check-ups, Johnny was pronounced healthy enough to start recovering at the DeSoto’s. Although normally he could have been sent home that morning, after having to be checked over by Doctor Early, Doctor Druthers and both therapists, Roy and Joanne agreed to wait until after lunch so Johnny could take a nap. It also gave Mike Stoker time to recover a bit from his shift so he could come and help with the trip home. When they were finally on the way out of the hospital,†¦show more content†¦Ã¢â‚¬Å"His wife will be by to drop off Chris soon after and to pick him up.† â€Å"It’ll be fine. He’s like a dad to everyone who works for him,† Joanne reassured John. â€Å"Now, how about we get you in the car?† Nodding, Johnny allowed Mike and Roy to help him stand up before walking a couple of feet to the car. Turning slightly, Roy and Mike gently set him down and watched as Johnny slowly moved his feet behind the driver’s car. Closing the door behind their friend, Mike went around the other side while Roy went to help Joanne get the wheelchair, walker and suitcases into the truck of their car. â€Å"Johnny?† Mike cautiously asked, seeing his eyes were closing. â€Å"Hmmm?† â€Å"You need to buckle up yet before we can get going.† â€Å"Huh?† Johnny was confused. What does he mean by that? I have pajama pants on†¦no buckle on. Seeing the confused look, Mike slowly reached over and took the seat belt and explained what he was doing. As he was finishing, Roy and Jo slipped into the car, asking if everyone was all set. Assuring them that he and John were, Mike kept an eye on Johnny as they made their way to the DeSoto’s home. Although Mike would have bet Johnny would have fallen asleep, the sights kept him wide awake. â€Å"Whoa,† John breathed out as the passed high rises and buildings he had never before seen. â€Å"Huge!† Turning into the residential area they lived in, Roy heard Johnny suck in his breath. When they finally arrived at the

Essay On Implication Of JK-STAT - 1490 Words

Implications of JAK-STAT in disease So far, we have seen that this pathway is accountable for the transduction of extracellular stimulus into transcriptional factors that regulate several cellular functions. STATs are also known to exert additional functions such as affecting oxidative phosphorylation in mitochondria, regulating chromatin compliance and epigenetic markings in the nucleus and interacting with the microtubule components in the cytoplasm which are responsible for cellular motility (4). This pathway has been observed to play an integral role in the development of mammary gland, stem cells, lymphocytes, neuronal cells, eye cells, cardiomyocytes, adipocytes. Consequently, its dysregulation induces various diseases, including†¦show more content†¦STATs contribute significantly to cellular fate decisions of differentiating naà ¯ve T cells into regulatory and inflammatory T cells, lymphocyte development, and exercise control over the intensity and duration of inflammatory responses. STAT3 particularly is involved in the regulation of cell death, cell growth and in the transcription of inflammatory genes. This serves as the basis for its contribution to the development of chronic inflammatory diseases and neurodegenerative diseases (8). This pathway has been associated with several monogenic diseases like the ‘bubble boy’ syndrome (X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency). The extreme susceptibility to pathogens observed is caused by a lack of T and NK cells, which occurs due to loss of function variants of the common ÃŽ ³ chain signal transduction. A subset of SCID patients demonstrated mutations in Jak3 kinase specifying the non-redundant in vivo functions for any JAK/STAT component (9). After the initial discovery of JAK3-SCID, many Mendelian disorders were reported. Discoveries made in the past three decades help us to correlate loss of function STAT mutations with specific types of pathogens. STAT1 mutations make patients vulnerable to viral and mycobacterial infections, whereas patients having STAT2 mutations are prone to viral infections and fungal infections are most common in patients with STAT3 mutations (2). The last 20 years have brought to the fore remarkable connections between JAK-STAT