A “dignified silence” would have been a wiser move for the Duke of Sussex if he wants a reconciliation with the royal family as he has given them “nothing” by speaking publicly to suggest he can be trusted with their private information, a commentator has said.
After losing the latest round in his court battle over security, Harry, 40, told the BBC that the King will not speak to him and he does not know “how much longer my father has” left.
Majesty Magazine’s managing editor Joe Little found Harry’s comments about the health of Charles – who is being treated for cancer – “quite alarming”.
In his BBC interview, Harry said: “And I said, life is precious. I don’t know how much longer my father has, he, he won’t speak to me because of this security stuff, but it would be nice to reconcile.”
Mr Little told the PA news agency: “From what Harry is saying, despite admitting that he has not spoken to his father for some time, I thought it sent out a bit of a mixed message, really.
“Is Harry suggesting that the King isn’t as well as we are led to believe?”
Mr Little described the overall situation as “a very unfortunate state of affairs” and is uncertain if it helps repair tensions since Harry and Meghan stepped away from being working members of the royal family as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in 2020, and to a new life in the US with their children.
Mr Little said: “I think for somebody who is seeking reconciliation with his father, his brother and his family, his royal family as a whole, I think the very last thing that he should have been doing was talking publicly.
“He clearly feels aggrieved at the outcome of this legal action but there is a great deal to be gained by maintaining a dignified silence – sadly, as we know from from past events, this isn’t Harry’s way of doing things.
“Maybe lessons just haven’t been learned from previous occasions where also silence would have been the very best thing to maintain.”
On whether a reconciliation could take place soon, he added: “It’s hard to see how that would be possible, but never say never.”
The rift between the Sussexes and the royal family opened significantly following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, during which they alleged a member of the family was concerned about their son Archie’s skin tone before he was born.
Then the duke claimed in his controversial memoir, Spare, that William had physically attacked him and that the King put his own interests above Harry’s and was jealous of Meghan.
In a series of interviews to promote the book, Harry attacked the reputation of Camilla, saying her willingness to forge relationships with the British press made her “dangerous” and he said she tried to rehabilitate her “image” at his cost.
Mr Little said: “The fact that all this has been aired in such a public way would not fill any family member with confidence about the future, because you would never be 100% sure that whatever private conversations you had with Prince Harry might not appear in print or in a podcast at some point in the future.
“It’s a lot of damage to be repaired. Is the damage irreparable? It is hard to see a way forward with this really.”
Harry, who appeared emotional and close to tears through much of Friday’s TV interview, said he could “forgive my family’s involvement”, naming Charles, the Prince of Wales and his stepmother, the Queen, in events since he began dating his wife Meghan in 2016.
Mr Little thinks that “probably for them (the royal family), the situation is totally unchanged”.
He said: “This is Harry as they have seen him operate for the best parts of the last five years, with the Oprah Winfrey interview and then, or more recently, his book.”
Harry’s level of security changed in 2020 when he and Meghan stepped down as working royals and moved to California, and he suggested the royal family and officials hoped his realisation of the increased safety risk “would force us to come back”.
Harry lost a Court of Appeal challenge over his security arrangements while in the UK and said in the TV interview he “can’t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the UK”.
He failed in his appeal against the dismissal of his High Court claim against the Home Office, over the decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) that he should receive a different degree of protection when in the UK.
When asked in the interview if Charles had been approached to use his influence in Harry’s legal problems, the duke appeared to imply the King was a hindrance, a comment likely to deepen the rift with his father and his brother, the Prince of Wales.
He said: “I’ve never asked him to intervene, I’ve asked him to step out of the way and let the experts do their job.”
Mr Little said it was unlikely that Charles could have intervened, adding: “The fact that Harry was was taking legal action against his father’s government meant that the very last thing that His Majesty could do is intervene in a situation such as this.
“It has constitutional significance. It would have been a very unwise move on the King’s part to even attempt such a thing.”
