Imphal, January 28: Describing former Mizoram Chief Minister Zoramthanga as immature and over-ambitious, DPP working president Udoy Thongam and convenor of the party's Committee on Territorial Integrity, RK Anand today said Zoramthanga has no role to play on the question of the State's territorial integrity.

Reacting to the former rebel leader's suggestion for a committee to redefine boundaries of North Eastern States, the two leaders said Zoramthanga has no knowledge even on .the historical fact of his own State, Mizoram.

Supplementing the charge, they said that in between 1840 and 1850 a group of tribe known as New Kuki was driven out from the then Lushai Hill Range by a Lushai chief Lallula.

The displaced villagers were allowed to settle in Manipur as peaceful subjects.

Zoramthanga appears not to know this, they said.

Illustrating further, Udoi and Anand said Manipur was recognized universally as an Asian Nation when the Treaty of Yandaboo was signed in 1826.Regarding the State's boundary, they contended that it was neither granted by British colonial ruler nor Govt of India but the 2000 year history of the Manipur vividly confirms its existence and size.

In fact after the Britishers came, Manipur's boundary has been reduced considerably, they maintained.

On the issue of Greater Mizoram, Udoi Thongam said that Zoramthanga's mentor and former Chief Minister Laldenga dropped the idea when reality dawned on him.

He suggested Zoramthanga rectify his mistakes and follow the path of the late Laldenga.

Zoramthanga should not pursue or make comments that could emit confusing signal to the people of concerned States, he added.

Some Mizos have accepted themselves as belonging to a lost tribe of Israel, would Zoramthanga claim Israel as part of Mizoram, the working president asked.

On claims of Th Muivah that Government of India has recognized the distinct history of Nagas, RK Anand said barring existence of Naga hills as part of Assam, Tuensang area as part of the then NEFA (present Arunachal Pradesh) and creation of Nagaland State in 1963, there is not much that can be called Naga history, as understood by the NSCN (IM) leaders.

While Muivah can express gratitude to Govt of India for recognizing him as a citizen of India and issuing a passport, it would be wrong on his part to claim that India has recognized Naga history, said Anand.

He also comprehended that chairman of NSCN (IM) Isak Chisi's silence on the issue of Greater Nagaland might be due to the leader's acceptance that Nagaland is one of the State of India and not otherwise.

Comment