Prince Harry is an international problem.
As the son of the King of England, Harry is a celebrity; he’s famous for being famous, rather than for any particular talent or position. He isn’t a governmental official, though he pretends to be one. He isn’t even particularly well-liked. He and his wife gather headlines and can throw a public temper tantrum, which is covered by the New York Times and the BBC.
This weekend, Harry drew international headlines yet again. He lost a major security case in the UK. At the heart of the matter is the question: do some famous people deserve publicly-funded security at the cost of millions per year? Can a famous person demand governmental protection and even dictate how that security should work? The UK courts have definitively said no.
Harry and Meghan stepped down as senior members of the royal family in 2020 and moved abroad. Since he didn’t live in the country anymore and wasn’t doing any official functions for the crown, the government changed his security status. When he was in the UK, the government said they would protect him based on international threat levels and intelligence at that moment. With a few weeks’ notice, the government security system would assess the threat level and create a “bespoke” plan. If he stayed on royal property, he would have even higher levels of protection. But that wasn’t good enough for Harry.
Harry wanted to have armed protection officers around himself and his family at a moment’s notice, both in England and abroad. He wanted to travel in a five-car caravan with blacked-out windows and decoy cars. Since private security isn’t allowed to carry guns, he wanted the government to provide him with armed security and special vehicles — everything that his brother gets. Rather than a “bespoke” security plan, Harry wanted high-level security at all times, whenever he wanted.
Harry said that even though he isn’t a working royal anymore, he is still a prince, and therefore should always have the highest protection. After a few months of public squabbles, he said he would pay the UK for the additional expenses of giving him the special treatment.
The UK said, “Um, no. You can’t rent our cops. They are not for sale. And don’t worry, we’re going to protect you. We just don’t want you telling us how to do it.”
Outside the King, Queen, and the Wales, the other royal family has limited security. When they are on royal grounds, they all have protection. That’s why Prince Andrew never goes far. The others have protection only when doing their ribbon-cutting services. Andrew’s girls have no official protection.
Another issue is that Prince Harry wants to retain the International Protected Person (IPP) status for himself and his entire family. IPP status grants an individual A+ protection in any country around the world, and it is paid for by that country. A person with IPP status is treated as a representative of a country, gets diplomatic immunity, and even protection against financial disclosure of foundations.
IPP status would come in handy when Harry and his wife travel the world and have people curtesy to them. It would also give him and his family the appearance of being royals, even though they no longer do any formal functions for the King, and nobody in the royal family will answer their phone. Royal appearances give him relevance, access to the BCC, and a brand which can be translated into profit in the international jam business.
Last Friday, Harry lost his fourth case to gain control over his security in the UK and to retain his IPP status. He has to cover the legal fees for both sides of the case — $1.5 million. A few short hours later, he was talking to the BBC about his disappointment with the case and his relationship with his family. The BBC was already waiting for him in Monticito to respond to the legal case.
The rumor is that Harry was expecting to win and wasn’t prepared to discuss a loss, which might explain Harry’s television performance. He came across as incoherent, paranoid, entitled, and dumb. If you haven’t seen the interview, you really should check it out. Amazingly, his press secretary let that happen.
Harry told the BBC interviewer that the “royal household” instructed the government not to protect him adequately. He thinks that his father wants him to be killed by a Taliban assassin. He said that he is always a prince, even if he doesn’t do any work for the King. In addition, politicians have lifetime protection even after they leave office, so he should, too.
Harry has $60m in the bank. He should be able to pay for the security, just like Taylor Swift and Beyoncé. But Harry said that private security isn’t enough. He needs government protection.
He thinks that his family used security to control him and his wife, but at the same time, he says he wants to reconcile with his father and brother. He said that his father doesn’t have long to live, so reconciliation would be nice. He never apologized for his behavior over the past five years; rather, in a written statement that followed the interview, he said that he has no regrets.
Harry makes no sense. The BBC later apologized for not pushing Harry to explain the inconsistencies in his story.
So, what’s next? The royal family could strip him of the Duke of Sussex title and get him to stop calling himself “his royal highness.” (Harry hates the royalty, but still calls himself “Prince Harry”.) The King and Parliament can’t remove his “Prince” title; he’s got that one for life. One dumb prince exposed the limitations of a hereditary government.
The king will pass on at some point. His brother will become king. Will Harry be invited to the funeral and the other pageantry? Probably not. His kids won’t run through the halls of Buckingham Palace with their cousins. Harry and his wife will become more irrelevant, more bitter, and more unlikable, until they won’t even be able to get an interview with People Magazine.
Imagine being given the golden ticket in life — wealth, adoration, castles, an extended family, interactions with the world’s most interesting people — and ripping it up to live alone on the beach in California. It’s a Shakespearean story.
Hi all. Thanks for indulging me today with a little royal family fluff. It’s a rainy Sunday here in Jersey, and I wanted to write about fluff.
Thanks that you did the yeoman’s work to listen to him. Ironic as life can be I’d never thought I would defend him, but here you go. His invictus games are not all to bad and highlight that even in high tech wars people get seriously injured for life. Finally, the UK Royals have not have the best hand in picking PR consultants
Well, I was the stupid one for reading your « fluff. ». Sigh.