India, Nov. 11 -- In May, Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said that the state government would issue firearm licences to "indigenous" people living in "remote and vulnerable areas" of the state. Last week, he said the first lot of licences would be issued in February. The policy is flawed on multiple counts. First, the responsibility of providing security to citizens, irrespective of where they reside, rests with the State. The external borders are to be defended by the armed forces, and within the country, the police are entrusted with the task. The State must have monopoly over violence, subject to oversight from Parliament and the judiciary. Second, the State must not discriminate among citizens over their "indigenity". "Indigenity" is a politically charged word in Assam, with a history of stoking religious polarisation and violence. Arming a section of society under this category is a fraught project. Three, the policy is meant to prevent "infiltration". Infiltration is a serious issue in Assam's riverine region that borders Bangladesh. But it is also a complex issue that calls for sensitive handling by the State since the process has been shaped by the region's vulnerable geography and complicated history. This too has been politicised, though Sarma has claimed his policy is religion-neutral. A society armed with legal approval to use firearms may upset the delicate pact that ties citizens to the State and result in vigilante groups. India's experience with arming civilians for self-protection is instructive. The Salwa Judum in Chhattisgarh, wherein the State raised village militias to counter the Maoists, led to the militarisation of the region and had to be folded up on the Supreme Court's orders. That Maoism is on its last legs owing to coordinated security action carries a lesson: There are no shortcuts to good policing, be it in Chhattisgarh or Assam....