David Lammy has cost Britain a crucial ally against Putin

In September last year a European country was wiped off the map. The Republic of Artsakh capitulated to Azerbaijan; its government was dissolved and virtually its entire population of 120,000 ethnic Armenians fled to Armenia itself. The land is now all but comprehensively depopulated.

Speaking in April to some of these refugees in Yerevan, few thought there was any chance they would ever return to their ancestral home. They were convinced they would never again be able to visit their forebears’ graves; the Armenian churches and other cultural landmarks that had stood on this land for a 1,000 years would soon be eviscerated.

Artsakh, or Nagorno-Karabakh as it is more commonly known, was itself established by force of arms at the time of the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. It was not recognised by any internationally-recognised state. Under international law, its territory almost certainly was part of Azerbaijan – although the population overwhelmingly wanted to have nothing to do with the Baku regime and it was only under Baku’s tutelage due to the absurdities of the nationalities policy of Lenin and Stalin.

Regardless of the legalities of Nagorno-Karabakh’s sovereignty, the ethnic cleansing of 120,000 people in Europe just a year ago is something that should have created much moral indignation. Whether these people were expelled, as Armenia states, or left of their own free will, as Azerbaijan insists, is rather beside the point. They did not pack all their belongings and flee en masse over a matter of just days because they thought the arrival of Azeri troops would herald a glorious future. Whatever happened, it certainly was not a “liberation”.

Yet our Foreign Secretary David Lammy has described it as a liberation. Writing on his Substack this week, Lammy states, “Azerbaijan has been able to liberate territory it lost in the early 1990s.” Our Labour Government is not shy about pronouncing on the morality of other nations and how they conduct themselves. Barely a day goes by without Lammy condemning some aspect of how Israel is defending itself against Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iranian aggression.

How Palestinians were displaced – and to what extent it was Israeli push or pan-Arab pull – is still hotly debated. Yet the own Nakba of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh can just be blithely dismissed by our Foreign Secretary as a “liberation” barely a year after it happened. It surely suggests Lammy is not cut out for diplomacy.

It is also bad politics for another reason. Armenia has been an ally of Russia and a member of Putin’s answer to Nato, the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO). But it is deeply disillusioned with the Kremlin, not least for Russia’s complete lack of support during its conflict with Azerbaijan.

The country’s prime minister Nikol Pashinyan is doing his best to manoeuvre Armenia out of the Kremlin’s orbit and build closer relations with the West. In June Pashinyan declared that Armenia would be leaving the CSTO, but disentangling itself from Putin’s clutches will be a difficult task, especially as Russia still has a large air force base in Armenia, dating back to Soviet days.

Britain should be encouraging Armenia’s westward tilt. But Lammy’s throwaway remark is virtually designed to do the reverse. Perhaps the Foreign Secretary should get off Substack whilst he brushes up on his diplomatic skills.