He says he wants to reconcile with his family. But Prince Harry may have blown any chance of healing the rift with King Charles and the royals, thanks to his extraordinary BBC interview about the row over his security.
There’s an even greater wedge between the King and his second son now, thanks to Harry’s insinuation during the interview that his father could have resolved the whole issue of his lack of taxpayer-funded police protection, but hasn’t.
Harry’s three-year battle to get the British Home Office to provide around-the-clock security whenever he’s in the UK has proved to not only be a PR and financial disaster for the California-based royal, who may be hit with a $3 million bill for legal expenses, but is likely to be a “personal catastrophe” when it comes to his relationship with his family, explains royal writer Rebecca English.
She says if he continues to maintain it’s too dangerous for him to take his family to the UK, the King, 76, may never see Harry’s children, Prince Archie, six, and Princess Lilibet, three, again.
“Harry has boxed himself into a corner by dramatically arguing that his life is ‘at stake’,” says Rebecca. “If he sticks to this, it means he will indeed never be able to bring his children back to Britain.”
Burning bridges
Meanwhile, a comment Harry, 40, made about the health of the King, in which he said, “I don’t know how much longer my father has,” might be the thing that destroys any chance of his family ever welcoming him back.
The comment was in “poor taste”, according to several royal experts. It will leave His Majesty, who is still undergoing treatment for the cancer he was diagnosed with last year, distraught.
According to former royal press secretary Ailsa Anderson, Harry shouldn’t be speaking out about his father’s health. “What he said will cause real concern, and more speculation in the media and the wider public about the diagnosis. That is incredibly unhelpful.”
She adds that if he really wants to his family to welcome him back, he should make his attempts at reconciliation “in private, not in a BBC News interview”.
It occurred because Harry wanted to speak out after losing his battle in court. After judges ruled against his long-running bid to have security, which was stripped after he and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, 43, stopped being working royals in 2020, he told journalist Nada Tawfik that the outcome was a “good old-fashioned establishment stitch-up”.
He accused the royal household of interfering in his attempts to reinstate his police bodyguards because the King’s private secretary, Sir Clive Alderton, sits on the committee that made the decision about axing his security. In what appeared to reference his late mother, Princess Diana, he said, “I don’t want history to repeat itself. Through the court process, I have discovered that some people want history to repeat itself.” He didn’t name names.
Harry – who forks out for bodyguards in the US – says he and his family have received “well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats, including from Al-Qaeda”.
His downfall
Royal biographer Ingrid Seward can understand his concerns because he is in a “dangerous situation”. However, she says he hasn’t helped his cause.
“He talked about shooting the Taliban in his book Spare and then wonders why he is on their hit list,” she reflects. “Harry’s stubbornness will almost certainly prevent him from bringing his wife and children to the UK.
“If he indeed wants reconciliation, why does he still attack his family? If he did say sorry to his father and those he has hurt, he would be admitting he was wrong. Harry has such a weak sense of self, he seems incapable to doing that.”
Harry told the BBC that he had forgiven members of his family for the hurt they caused him. However, mending fences was now in his father’s hands.
He said, “I would love reconciliation with my family. There’s no point in continuing to fight any more.”
Royal expert Professor Kate Williams doubts if Harry can repair his shattered relationships. She said the interview showed he is “bristling with anger and resentment, and mistrust of the royal household. It’s a sad and sorry saga”.
Harry’s security battle in a timeline
February 2020
After the Sussexes left their roles as working royals, Royal And VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) ruled that whenever they visited the UK from their home in the US, Harry and Meghan were not entitled to the level of police protection they’d previously received.
June 2021
Harry claimed his security had been compromised due to a lack of police protection during a visit to London to unveil a statue of his mother Diana. Photographers allegedly chased his car.
September 2021
Harry began legal action against the Home Office, the government department responsible for Ravec’s decisions.
February 2022
During a preliminary hearing, the court heard that Harry had previously said he was prepared to pay for UK security himself rather than expecting taxpayers to foot the bill. He said his US team did not have adequate jurisdiction in the UK or access to local intelligence information that was needed to keep his family safe.
May 2023
Harry asked for a judicial review of the Home Office’s decision not to let him pay for police protection. The Home Office argued that officers are not “private bodyguards for the wealthy”. The request for a review was thrown out.
December 2023
A hearing into Harry’s claim heard he felt “singled out” by Ravec and its decision was “unfair”. Ravec reiterated that he wasn’t eligible for protection because he was no longer a working royal.
February 2024
Harry’s claim was dismissed. Four months later, he challenged that ruling in the Court of Appeal.
May 2025
The Court of Appeal ruled against Harry, meaning the decision that he can’t have police protection stands.
Related stories
Native ad body.
Native ad body.
Native ad body.
