I do not think so. The LTTE's demise was dedicated towards the 2 factors:

1. The insistance of Prabakharan to have a "standing Army" instead of a guerilla force, which his veteran commanders insisted. He invested more and more in artillery, and heavy equipment. So when the SRi Lanka Govt FINALLY mobilized, PRabakharan was on a disadvantage. He believed things would just go status quo.

2. Desertion of war and tactics chief, Col. Karuna. If Col. Karuna stood by LTTE side, Sri Lanka Army wouldn't have even mobilized. The LTTE was divided up into Northern Tamils from Jaffna area and Eastern Tamils from Batticola. Karuna was in charge of the Eastern. That's where their GRUNT MANPOWER ala FOOT TROOP manpower came from. THe North Jaffna was more known for attracting white collar LTTE, officers, spec. force etc. Karuna alleged that tho the East Batticola troops suffered the BRUNT of the hits, PRabakharan used partitionism to favour North Jaffna Tamils only. So his war chief defected- and ...more

Give the devil his due. He tried his best to eliminate the LTTE making use of the limited resources at his command and that too against heavy odds and oppositions from Paper Tiger India, U.S.A and Europe who still threaten him to drag to World Court for human rights violations and war crimes. You may not agree with him for the methods adopted. However, from his point of view and from his countrys point of view, everything is fair in war (against terrorists). What matters is that he succeeded and now Sri Lanka is very peaceful and on the growth path towards economic recovery badly battered during its more than two decades of civil war.

Yes.
Because he gathered active military support from Pakistan and China along with India's inactive support.
Bur then, LTTE had to die it's own death for taking on entire world. It's wrong leadership will always be marked in the history.