Ghulam Ambia Khan Lohani (2 December 1892 – 17 September 1938), stylized as G. A. K. Lohani, or Luhani, was a Bengali revolutionary, journalist and professor from modern-day Bangladesh who struggled against British Raj.
During 1914–1925, Lohani lived in Europe, where he studied law and then became active in the local labor movement and Indian independence movement. Inspired by Russia's 1917 October Revolution, he attended the 1921 3rd World Congress of the Communist International where he corresponded with Vladimir Lenin. In 1925, he moved permanently to the USSR, where he worked as a translator, researcher and professor, authoring numerous articles on South Asian society and revolutionary strategy.
In 1938, during the Great Purge, Lohani was arrested and executed by the NKVD on false charges of espionage. He was posthumously rehabilitated (found innocent) in 1957.
Biography
Early life Ghulam Ambia Khan Lohani was born into a Bengali Muslim Khan Pathan family descended from the Lohani tribe in Sirajganj, then part of the Pabna District of modern-day Bangladesh. His mother's name was Syeda Sirajunnesa and his father Ghulam Azam Khan Lohani was a lawyer. He was nicknamed "Maju" and had two younger brothers. Lohani studied at Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College, the predecessor of today's Aligarh Muslim University.
Studies in Europe
In 1914, Lohani moved to London to study law. According to Bhupendranath Datta, he lived a "fast life" there and married a French woman. In 1916, he was listed as a member of the British Committee of the Indian National Congress. In 1917, he wrote to the widowed Lady Juliet Duff: "I seldom hear from you these days. The post is as barren as a wilderness. Yours truly, GAK Luhani." From 1917–1920, Lohani was active in the labor and socialist movements and unaffiliated to any party. During this time he was a paid campaigner for the National Council for Civil Liberties.
Lohani was inspired by the 1917 October Revolution and became active in the Hands Off Russia movement. Speaking at a 1919 London conference demanding the withdrawal of British troops from Russia, he was billed as a member of the Industrial Workers of the World. The anti-socialist British Empire Union wrote a letter to the Home Office dated 15 January 1919, warning them about this event due to its organizers' links with Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, and Rosa Luxemburg, the presence of activists like Sylvia Pankhurst, and an alleged connection between Lohani and "the Chicago trials". The letter concluded by suggesting Lohani's deportation: "Surely such men as Luhani can be deported. we [sic] do not want the scum of the earth in this country."Gidley, p. 65
In 1919, Lohani was also organizing lascars in London into the Workers' Welfare League of India led by Shapurji Saklatvala. Datta wrote that Lohani was introduced to Virendranath Chattopadhyaya ("Chatto") in Berlin, by the latter's sister Sarojini Naidu. They worked together during and after World War I.
Third Comintern Congress (1921)
Visit to Moscow In May 1921, following discussions between the Soviet government and remnants of the Berlin-based Indian Independence Committee,Basu, p. 89 Lohani visited Moscow alongside fellow independence fighters Chatto, Pandurang Sadashiv Khankhoje, Bhupendranath Datta, Nalini Gupta, Abdul Hasan, and Agnes Smedley, to take part in the Third Comintern Congress as representatives of India. The name "India" at the time referred to the British Raj, a colonial state which included modern-day India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.
"Thesis on India and the World Revolution" Alongside Chatto and Khankhoje, Lohani challenged the "left" communist line of the existing Communist Party of India (founded in Tashkent in 1920 by M. N. Roy, Abani Mukherji, and M. P. T. Acharya) by publishing a 14-page document, "Thesis on India and the World Revolution", which they sent to Lenin and the ECCI on 7 July 1921, and presented to the Oriental Commission of the Third Congress. Roy claimed that Lohani wrote the document. According to Chatto's biographer Nirode K. Barooah, the document strongly bears Chatto's writing style, but it was Lohani who read the document out loud to the commission.Barooah, p. 174
The thesis (or "theses") opened by asserting that out of all of Asia and Africa, British India had the most importance for the world revolution. However, the authors also cautioned against excessive enthusiasm.Barooah, p. 163
The first part began with a detailed analysis of the South Asian social and political situation. The proletariat of British India was described as overlapping with the peasantry due to seasonal employment. The working class represented at maximum 5 million out of 315 million, poorly organized with low class consciousness, and sharply divided by "vertical lines" of caste and religion.Barooah, pp. 163-4 They blamed India's underdevelopment on the "imperial policy of England to keep India in an industrially backward condition".Barooah, p. 164
The second part called for an anti-imperialist united front with nationalist groups,Persits, p. 262 arguing that national liberation was a necessary first step toward proletarian class consciousness. The overthrow of British imperialism would be followed immediately by socialist revolution.Persits, p. 263
The final part of the document targeted British imperialism, "more than any other bourgeois coalition in existence today" as the main "menace" to Soviet Russia and world communism.Barooah, p. 166 Lohani, Chatto, and Khankoje further alleged that the British proletariat could not be trusted to support their revolution.Persits, p. 264 They pointed to the weakness of the Communist Party of Great Britain, which they explained by the presence of a large "Labour Aristocracy" within the British working class, complicit in the imperialist system and unwilling to oppose colonial exploitation.Barooah, p. 165
Opposition to Tashkent CPI The thesis had indirectly undermined the existing authority of Roy and the "Tashkent" CPI by calling for a new propaganda organization to recruit advanced workers in British India.Persits, p. 261 Speaking in defense of the thesis, Lohani went further and called the CPI a "bogus party", demanding it be disaffiliated from the Comintern and a new organization formed to replace it. Ironically, Muzaffar Ahmad later cited Lohani's indirect admission of the CPI's Comintern affiliation as proof of the party's legitimacy.
On 4 August 1921, Chatto and Lohani elaborated their criticisms in a follow-up document, "Memorandum to the Indian Commission to the Comintern". They also requested to meet with Lenin personally to present their case. The memorandum insisted that the CPI had been founded prematurely by Europe-based expatriates and dubious communists, and reiterated the demand for a propaganda organization on the ground as the prelude to forming a real party. Roy later remarked, "it was evident from their behaviour that they wanted to challenge my right to represent the Indian revolutionary movement".Roy, Memoirs, pp. 489-90
Message from Lenin Lenin responded in a letter to Lohani, Chatto, and Khankhoje, as recalled by Chatto and recorded by his widow L. E. Karunovskaya: "I have read your Theses with great interest. But why the new theses? I shall soon talk with you about that."
According to Datta,Basu, p. 101 Lenin's response was more sympathetic: "I have read your theses. I agree with you. British imperialism must be destroyed. When I can meet you, will be communicated to you by my secretary. P.S.: Please excuse my incorrect English."Adhikari, Volume One, p. 255
Chatto stated that he lost the original copy of Lenin's letter.Barooah, p. 175 The register of Lenin's outgoing letters at the Marx–Engels–Lenin Institute lists a "No. 501" dated 8 July 1921, in English, addressed to Lohani, Chatto and Khankoje, but the letter is missing.
It is disputed whether the hoped-for meeting with Lenin ever took place. Roy claimed that Lenin received them in person (minus Lohani who was not considered senior enough), but the Soviet leader refused to commit to anything, and greatly disappointed them.Roy, Memoirs, p. 482 Datta never mentioned meeting Lenin, and in 1934 Chatto said that the meeting with Lenin never happened, because of Roy's scheming.Barooah, p. 288
End of the visit Lohani, Chatto, and Khankhoje were ultimately unsuccessful in winning Comintern support.Barooah, p. 168 According to Chatto, the main reason was that Comintern leaders Karl Radek and Bela Kun supported Roy, and prevented the Berlin group from meeting Lenin and Grigory Zinoviev.Barooah, p. 169 Both sides in the dispute accused each other of working for, or being linked to, imperialist foreign intelligence agencies.Barooah, p. 170
Lohani stayed behind in Moscow longer than the others, working at the Agitprop section at Comintern headquarters. Roy wrote that Lohani later met with him and expressed regret for taking Chatto's side.Roy, Memoirs, pp. 490-1 Roy had a poor opinion of Chatto and Smedley, but stated Lohani was an excellent orator who acted as the Berlin group's main spokesperson and author.Roy, Memoirs, pp. 484-5
Return to Western Europe From 1921–1925, Lohani moved frequently between France, Germany, and Switzerland, supporting himself as a journalist, translator and language instructor, and remaining politically active. In addition to Bengali and English, he spoke French, German, and Hindi. In Paris, Lohani co-founded and edited The Masses of India, a pro-Communist newspaper, and edited it together with Evelyn Trent Roy (wife of M. N. Roy). He also worked with the "Comité pro-Hindu" organized by Evelyn Roy and Henri Barbusse. In 1922 he published an article praising Mahatma Gandhi's organizing abilities, and acknowledging some merits of his civil disobedience tactic for the independence struggle. On 4 February 1924, Lohani wrote from Paris to his mother, asking for money and complaining of health problems. His marriage was also breaking down.
Life in the USSR
Cominternist Academic In 1925, Lohani moved to the USSR after the French government revoked his residency permit due to his anti-British activities. Living in Moscow as a Comintern operative, Lohani wrote a number of articles on South Asian society and revolutionary strategy. He sided with Roy against Eugen Varga's thesis that imperialism was preventing any significant industrialization in British India. Lohani argued that Britain was industrializing its South Asian colony through investment and modernization of production,Gupta, pp. 75-6 and export of capital there had been a stated goal of the British government since the Indian Industrial Commission of 1916–1918. He cited expansion of the iron industry and capitalist transformation of agriculture as evidence that Britain was laying the groundwork for future industrialization, while maintaining that British rule was still incapable of ending feudal exploitation of the peasantry.