- Sri Lanka-“Ilankai” be a union of states
- Amalgamated Northern and Eastern Provinces, territory of which cannot be changed without its consent
- Parliament should be empowered to make laws for subjects under “List 1” that had defence, foreign affairs, currency, posts/telecommunications, immigration/emigration, foreign trade/commerce, railways, airports/aviation, broadcasting/television, customs, elections, and census only
- “List 2” had all other subjects, inclusive of law and order, land, etc., with the State Assembly possessing law-making powers
- The State Assembly should be empowered to levy taxes, cess/fees, and mobilise loans/grants
- Special provisions for Indian Tamils
- The elected members to be given enhanced powers
- Upgrading the judicial system, e.g. Provincial High Court to Appeal Court
- Muslim rights cared for
- Kolandivelu said: “…Sri Lanka is a tiny island. Cannot it be crushed? Within 24 hours it can be done. But I am not asking it to be crushed (29 April 1985).”
- Gopalaswamy said: “I would also request the Government to undertake every possible means, including the military intervention to solve the problem (13 May 1986).” He referred to an Indian Government statement: “It shows the spineless cowardice approach of this Government (8 May 1987).”
- Eastern Province to be demarcated minus Ampara Electoral District
- A PC to be established for the new Eastern Province
- Earlier discussed institutional linkages to be refined for Northern and Eastern PCs
- Government of Sri Lanka’s willingness to consider a proposal for second stage constitutional development for the two provinces
- Government of Sri Lanka’s willingness to create a post of vice president for a specified term
- The five Muslim parliamentarians from the Eastern Province may be invited to India to discuss matters of mutual concern
- What is the Indian stand in the debate on devolution and delegation?
- Where do India and Sri Lanka stand on the amalgamation of the Northern and Eastern Provinces?
- What is the stand on land use by the Indian Government, the Government of Sri Lanka, and the Tamil groups?
- What is the status of the language?
- What is the stand on law and order?
- What is the time frame for reaching a solution?
- What is the Indian Government’s stand on the foreign threats emerging in the context of the Sri Lankan issues?
- Devolution is “paralysed” by the partial implementation of 13A and delayed elections
- The amalgamation of provinces shelved judicially disfavouring India
- The land power-sharing issue is in India’s disfavour by Sri Lanka’s rejection
- The language issue is constitutionally solved but partially failed in its implementation
- Sri Lanka has disfavoured Indians by rejecting the law and order issue
- Timeframe for a solution is abstract, even after crushing the Tigers 12 years ago
- Foreign threats have heavily increased in India’s disfavour
- No military operations in the North and East
- Ceasing violence and power-sharing as a remedy was the demand then. Now, ceasing violence for peace is redundant. The interest is human rights and humanitarian violations, returning refugees, and reconciliation. The validity of 13A for these is low
- Interventions were limited to India then; now, it has spread internationally
- The Tamil demands were circulating mostly between the TULF and India, whereas the consequences of the Diaspora’s lobbying had created negative results
- Other than to gain politically in Tamil Nadu because the BJP is weak there, the Modi Government had much bigger stakes to focus on, i.e. Chinese expansionism, economic competition, Indo-Pacific and Indian Ocean Alliances, etc.
- The BJP has alternatives to win the Government of Sri Lanka, e.g. Kushinagar aviation, a $ 15 million grant for Buddhist affairs, financial swap deals, etc.