There are two steps to peace in Sri Lanka. First there should be an end to military violence, and the only way to end military violence is by force. That is my understanding. I have an article from Dr. Michael Radu where he says:
Ultimately, Western views and policies vis-à-vis Sri Lanka prove that humanitarian feelings and “human rights” are no policy alternative to common sense, and that even small countries, if desperate enough, could solve their secessionist/terrorist problems even despite the powerful human right NGOs pressures to commit national suicide. Second, and most important and with wider implications, short term, obsessive preoccupation with “civilian casualties” is often a death sentence to civilians in a civil war. The longer the war, especially when the victor is obvious, the more civilian casualties. Hence a military solution is, in some circumstances, the best way to save civilian lives. In general, pacifism, disguised as “human rights” or not, always leads to more death, especially in remote, third world, small countries vulnerable to the influence of AI or HRW. Ending a war—by force if need be—protects more civilians than prolonging it under any pretexts.
That fits very well with my idea. That is why I handed it to you. Somebody is trying to tell you that because of human rights we have to stop this war. But in the Sri Lankan context, if we have a ceasefire or talks, that will never end because the LTTE does not want to compromise their stand on a separate state. There are so many reasons why Sri Lanka cannot be separated. Therefore if you come to the table to have a separate state, there's no point in having peace talks or any kind of talk. You have to compromise your stand.
The Sri Lankan government has compromised their stand in several ways. At the beginning they didn't like to devolve power. Now they are going to a provincial level and they are going to devolve furthermore. If the LTTE cannot agree or compromise their stand, there's no point in having a ceasefire. The only way is to finish with a military solution and then continue with a political solution--those who understand the value of a political solution and the devolution of power, and those who understand to what limits Sri Lanka could go to solve this conflict.