Most men in their seventies, if they had to attend an arduous public event, would hope that their younger son’s presence would be the last thing they had to worry about. They might assume their offspring would be on hand to attend to their ageing parent; to offer comfort and support when required, and to discreetly deal with any difficulties that arose during the course of the day. That their child would be the greatest cause of the angst they might feel about the ceremony is not, in virtually every imaginable case, a woe that most people could ever consider.
For King Charles, alas, what’s going on with Prince Harry is probably most of what he thinks about these days. His son’s bestselling memoir, available in all reputable and disreputable outlets alike, has sold more copies than any non-fiction book in recent memory; and so Charles has the disgruntling knowledge that his child is now considerably more famous than he is. Under normal circumstances, such facts could safely be ignored. But their estrangement is a matter of public record, and now, with the coronation less than five months away, something has to be done about it.
William is said to fear that his younger brother might pull some stunt
It continues to look impossible for the Royal Family to maintain their silence over the furore occasioned by the Duke of Sussex; the best way of lancing the boil appears to be for Harry’s brother, the Prince of Wales, to give a public interview in which he expresses his compassion for his brother, and thereby kills the issue of his sensational public comments with fraternal kindness.
This has not happened, and so the bandwagon rumbles on. Yet now it has been suggested both that King Charles has asked the Archbishop of Canterbury to act as a go-between, and that he might make his own address on the eve of the coronation, albeit without any reference to his son. A source has informed the Mail on Sunday that:
‘The issue of substance is whether they attend the coronation, and if they do, under what terms and conditions. The family is split, and all the indications are that Harry is being advised to agree to nothing at this stage and ‘play it long’ right up to the last minute, which is making negotiations with him very difficult.’
Just as there has been an apparent schism with the treatment of Prince Andrew – the King is apparently prepared to allow him to have some public appearances with the Firm, albeit without expectation of a full return to duties, whereas the Prince of Wales wants him gone from public life – so the presence of the Duke of Sussex at the coronation seems to be a sticking point.
William is said to fear that his younger brother might pull some stunt to distract from the event. As a result, you can understand those who say Harry should be kept at arm’s length. Yet his father – if the report about recruiting Justin Welby to broker a deal is correct – appears to be taking a different option: one that might be personally humiliating, but would at least save face. The low-key presence of Harry and Meghan at the Queen’s funeral was widely seen as a compromise that preserved the dignity of all parties and avoided any unnecessary adverse publicity at a time that it would have been entirely unwelcome.
Yet the incessant media briefing, even down to the hints that King Charles might give his own televised interview on the eve of the coronation – presumably to lance the boil of speculation that exists – seems below the dignity of the Crown. Harry’s high profile has meant, regrettably, that he is in a position to issue demands – and the Royal Family have little option at the moment but to cede to them.
If Harry and Meghan do boycott the ceremony – just as his spiritual forbear the Duke of Windsor was absent from the Queen’s coronation – the scandal and rumours attending his non-appearance would overshadow what should otherwise be a glorious and cathartic day. For the sake of the country, and the family, this should be avoided.
Comments