The island of Sri Lanka, once the home of numerous ancient Tamil kingdoms, after gaining independence in 1948, evolved into a highly contested political and ethnic battleground. The Tamil national struggle, which intensified during the latter half of the 20th century, was rooted in fundamental demands for sovereignty, political autonomy, and survival. Central to this prolonged conflict were three primary political frameworks proposed as “solutions” to the Tamil national question: the Unitary State, Federalism, and an Independent Tamil Eelam.
These frameworks are not abstract academic concepts but real, historically tested political models with lasting implications on the lives and rights of the Tamil people. This article explores these three frameworks in-depth, analyzing their structure, historical performance, political consequences, and the realities they have created for Tamils in their homeland.
■.The Unitary State – A Framework of Systematic Oppression
The current political system in Sri Lanka is a unitary state, enshrined in its constitution. In this system, all legislative, administrative, and judicial powers are concentrated in Colombo, the capital, dominated by Sinhala-Buddhist political and military elites. The Tamil-majority regions in the North and East have no meaningful autonomy, with all authority flowing from the central government.
Under this centralized framework, Tamil aspirations for self-governance, cultural preservation, and economic development have been consistently suppressed. The unitary model denies the historical existence of the Tamil nation and treats Tamils merely as an ethnic minority with limited civil rights, rather than as a people with a right to political self-determination.
This model has facilitated systemic discrimination against Tamils through a variety of oppressive means. Politically, Tamils are underrepresented in governance, and their dissent is criminalized under draconian laws such as the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). Linguistically, the Tamil language is often relegated despite being nominally official. Culturally, Tamil heritage sites are subject to destruction or Sinhalization. Land in Tamil areas is routinely seized for Sinhala settlements or military use. Tamil education is marginalized, the judiciary is biased, and the military occupation of Tamil areas remains heavy even years after the end of war.
In essence, the unitary state has created a highly militarized, undemocratic, and ethnocratic environment that has stripped Tamils of political agency and entrenched a system of state-sponsored oppression.
■.Federalism – A Transitional Power-Sharing Model
Some propose federalism as a middle path—more autonomy than the unitary state but short of full independence. In federal models, power is constitutionally shared between central and regional governments, with each tier possessing certain exclusive powers. For Tamils, federalism has been presented as a possible mechanism for securing regional autonomy within a united Sri Lanka.
In theory, federalism could provide Tamil regions with control over language policy, education, land management, and local security. Cultural preservation could be guaranteed, and resource allocation could be handled more equitably at the regional level. A federal constitution could also ensure that Tamil rights are protected against the majoritarian impulses of the Sinhala state.
However, in Sri Lanka, federalism has historically been treated with suspicion by Sinhala leaders, who view it as a veiled form of secession. Numerous attempts at negotiating federal or quasi-federal arrangements—including the Bandaranaike–Chelvanayakam Pact, the Indo-Lanka Accord, and the Interim Self-Governing Authority (ISGA) proposal—were either abandoned or undermined. Even the much-celebrated 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which established Provincial Councils, failed to grant significant power to the provinces and left key subjects like police and land firmly under central control.
Thus, while federalism might offer a theoretical solution, in the realpolitik of Sri Lanka, it has often been used to delay genuine political change and weaken Tamil demands for sovereignty. Federalism, without an honest and enforceable constitutional settlement, risks becoming yet another deceptive compromise.
■.Independent Tamil Eelam – The Path to True Liberation
The demand for an independent Tamil Eelam emerged from decades of failed negotiations, state violence, and systemic denial of Tamil rights. It was first articulated in the Vaddukoddai Resolution of 1976 and became the political goal of the Tamil liberation movement, both through peaceful political means and, later, through armed resistance led by the Tamil Eelam Liberation Tigers (LTTE).
An independent Tamil Eelam envisions a sovereign, democratic, and secular Tamil state in the historical Tamil homelands of the North and East of the island. This state would be based on the right of the Tamil people to self-determination, a principle recognized in international law and embedded in the United Nations Charter and numerous human rights treaties.
Such a state would provide complete control over language policy, education, internal security, cultural preservation, economic development, and international relations. It would enable Tamils to govern themselves without interference from a hostile central authority. It would also serve as a guarantee against the recurring cycles of genocide, displacement, and cultural erasure that Tamils have suffered under the Sri Lankan unitary system.
From a legal perspective, the right to independence is supported by precedents such as the International Court of Justice’s ruling on Kosovo and the principles of the Montevideo Convention, which outlines the qualifications for statehood. The Tamil Eelam movement has, at various points, demonstrated de facto control over territory, a functioning administrative system, judicial structures, and international diplomatic capacity through its diaspora network.
Though militarily crushed in 2009, the spirit of Tamil Eelam remains alive in the hearts of the global Tamil nation. The call for independence continues to be articulated by Tamil political formations, civil society, and the diaspora. It represents not only a political solution but a moral imperative to protect the identity, dignity, and future of the Tamil people.
■.Final Reflection: The Tamil Struggle Is a Liberation Movement, Not a Minority Plea
The Tamil national question is not simply about minority rights or ethnic coexistence—it is a struggle for freedom, nationhood, and survival. The unitary state has functioned as a vehicle of genocide. Federalism, though conceptually promising, has been historically abused as a political delay tactic. Only the vision of an independent Tamil Eelam addresses the full spectrum of Tamil aspirations: political sovereignty, cultural survival, justice for war crimes, and protection against future oppression.
This is not a matter of separatism but of self-preservation. The Tamil people are not asking to separate from a nation—they are asking to survive as a nation.
If the global community truly believes in democracy, human rights, and the right to self-determination, then the cause of Tamil Eelam deserves not only understanding but active support.
“When we lose our land, our language, and our freedom, we lose ourselves.”
Let this generation rise—not to negotiate survival within oppression, but to reclaim freedom with dignity.
– Eelaththu Nilavan.
09/06/2025
