One of the positive outcomes of the current debate on the proposed political solution is that most debaters have accepted that there is a problem. The debate has gradually matured from arguing about existence of "a problem" to finding solutions to "the problem". Today, they are debating the 13th Amendment, 13 plus or minus, home-grown or imported, the unit of devolution and basis of devolution, etc.

Another development is that many liberal and Marxist political forces, who promoted a federal solution, have dropped the idea of a federal solution, aligning with the heart beat of the general public. However, they are now for the full implementation of the 13th amendment or 13 plus, and their reasoning is basically derived from international politics and the critical Indian factor.

The other development is that the political forces that promoted the 13th Amendment as opposed to both federalism and separatism are facing a new challenge because certain participants in the debate are trying to brand them as separatists. Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka is in the forefront as a target of this campaign. I do not believe that this debate contributed to Dayan’s premature termination of service which has been condemned by many. The editorial of The Island on 21-07-2009 pointed out that "Dayan could not have been fired because of his views on the 13th Amendment as President Mahinda Rajapaksa himself has been talking of ‘13th Amendment plus’. And there are many ministers in the Rajapaksa government promoting devolution in keeping with the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord. So, why should only Dayan be penalised?"

Many liberal SLFPers and some former JVPers (NFF) too are now supporting the 13th Amendment or 13 minus, while hardcore SLFPers and some JHUers at least are silent (not against) it – and their reasoning is that it is already embedded in the Constitution.

Regarding the unit of devolution, some elements argue that "In a tiny island like Sri Lanka, it (devolution) should mean decentralisation of governmental power and not the creation of several regional powers. During the Premadasa regime, GSN units were increased from 4,000 to 14,000! These can be rearranged or merged to fit in with ecology-based Grama Rajya units" as C. Wijeyawickrema argued in a web publication on 10-7-2009. In a parallel argument, Neville Ladduwahetty argues that "The province as the peripheral unit is not suited to meet the aspirations of the Tamil and Muslim minorities because large segments of their communities live outside the Northern and Eastern provinces. The district on the other hand being smaller is better suited to meet their needs". This need to develop a unit of devolution is gaining more prominence now to solve the problem.

On the other hand, a home-grown solution has become the most favoured solution. According to the President, he knows what should be devolved and what should not be, but he is waiting for the agreement of the Tamil leaders and the mandate of the people to propose and implement it (interview to The Hindu). That means, the root causes have been already identified and the President is ready to eliminate these root causes within a unitary State by a political solution. His move is to incorporate the problems unique to Tamils into a complete political solution to empower people on a territorial basis, but not ethnic-based territories, according to his interview with Time magazine, so that the Sinhala majority too is benefited.

However, there are a few individuals who still argue it should not be on a territorial basis. The main campaigner in this camp, Malinda Seneviratne, in an article in The Island on 17.07.09, takes a further step, criticising the 13th amendment and suggests "Surely, we can do better? Surely, we must do better, in a post-LTTE Sri Lanka?". In his closing remarks to the debate, Dayan argues in The Island of 17-07-2009, that" ...the Constitution ‘as is’ needs to be implemented because failing to do so is a green-light to anarchy" and suggests "So, yes, let the 13th be implemented (and why not the 17th too, by the way!)" though it is not the best but "an erroneous piece of legislation". He further admits that "...to the extent that the conflict is sourced to grievances that are perceived to go beyond problems that are common to all Sri Lankans, they should be addressed".

It is a positive development that LTTE terrorism has been identified as an effect and people are discussing the question of eliminating the root causes of this problem. Most importantly, the silver lining is that now the power of ultra nationalist forces to sabotage the implementation of any such solution, is now minimal.

The most dire issues such as the language problem have already been addressed constitutionally, but has still not been fully implemented as most Sinhala officers do not know Tamil and state and local authority correspondence is mainly in Sinhala.

For all these positive developments, a significant share of the credit should go to The Island for providing the stage for this debate. Whatever the solution is, I hope that this time it will be implemented and ensure long lasting peace in Sri Lanka.