A secret meeting between aides. A paparazzi pic. Next, a reunion?
That the King’s communications secretary was in talks with Harry’s team signals a truce could be on – if a leaked photo doesn’t scupper it.
Leaks, he’s known a few. Prince Harry, that is. A close reading of his autobiography would suggest that there are so many leaks at the palace that the Windsors risk sinking without trace.
Harry rails against a spin doctor who leaked “the details of our private summits with Camilla” before her wedding to Charles. He is furious that a plan for him and Meghan to move to South Africa “got leaked and scuppered” and he accuses palace staff of attempting to “sabotage” his relationship with Meghan by “leaking private stuff to the press about Meg and me”.
Now a “peace summit” between Harry’s PR team and the King’s spokesman has been leaked. Images of the meeting were splashed across a Sunday newspaper – a sign, for some, that the ice was thawing in the long-running feud between Harry and the royal family. Or his father, at least.
There were two particularly interesting things about the summit: the first being that it happened at all, given the animosity between the Sussexes and the rest of the family in the five years since they quit royal duties. The second most interesting thing is that the “pap” pictures of the meeting appeared.
Let’s deal with them in reverse order. Assuming it wasn’t a good old-fashioned journalist’s tip, whoever tipped off the press would have had a goal in mind. But it’s not entirely clear who the information serves.
Harry is understood to be “sanguine” about the pictures. After all, that’s what he has come to expect. His aides, meanwhile, say they are “frustrated” about the leak.
That would point towards the only other party present at the meeting. There’s only one problem with that; the palace is not known for benevolently dishing out such delicious nuggets of gossip to the Sunday papers.
The meeting itself was otherwise nondescript – or at least it was meant to be. A chance for both sides to start up “a new open channel of communication”, according to Harry’s side.
In May, Harry opened up his own channel of communication – via a prime-time interview on the BBC. The palace was not given advance warning.
The BBC had expected the duke to deliver a short statement after his defeat in the courts over his long-running bid to have his police security reinstated in the UK. Instead, it got a 30-minute stream of consciousness in which Harry simultaneously set out his stall as the injured party and launched what appeared to be another insult, saying “some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book”.
He added: “Of course, they will never forgive me for lots of things.” It sounded petulant and it felt like another attack, but it was the first time we’d heard Harry articulate a “eureka” moment; that it was his family’s role to forgive him, not the other way round.
He went on: “I would love reconciliation with my family. There’s no point in continuing to fight anymore. As I said, life is precious. I don’t know how much longer my father has. He won’t speak to me because of this security stuff. But it would be nice to reconcile.”
On Wednesday that process appeared to begin. Charles and Camilla returned to London after bidding farewell to French President Emmanuel Macron and wife Brigitte. The Queen had just headed off to Wimbledon and the King had finished hosting a reception with his Tour Artists at Buckingham Palace.
Late afternoon, Tobyn Andreae, the King and Queen’s communications secretary, left the palace to keep a commitment at the Royal Over-Seas League (ROSL). The club, of which the King is patron, was a seemingly appropriate setting for a meeting with his PR counterparts from Harry’s office, given that the club “champions international friendship across the world”.
Andreae’s guests were Meredith Maines, Harry’s communications officer and head of his household in Montecito, and Liam Maguire, his PR representative in the UK. Maines was over from the US for a few days and had set up meetings with various London contacts, all with the duke’s blessing.
The Times has learnt that there was no instruction from Harry for her to contact the Prince of Wales’s office. Buckingham Palace, however, was contacted and agreed to a meeting. When the King’s spokesman arrived at the club, Harry’s aides were already waiting inside.
Andreae brought a bottle of wine as a gift for Maines. Should they sit outside or in? The decision was taken, ironically it now seems, to sit outside for fear of being overheard within. On a balcony overlooking Green Park, the conversation began but within 10 minutes Maguire had spotted a photographer. He alerted Andreae and the three moved back inside to continue the meeting there.
On Saturday night the mystery of the photographer in the bushes was revealed when Andreae had a call from the Mail on Sunday alerting him to the story. He duly informed Harry’s team. So, how did the Mail know? And who does it suit?
While a social media commentator has remarked that Andreae “is giving main character energy”, he much prefers to be in the background, leaving the “main character” role to “the boss”, aka the King, and “the lady boss”, aka the Queen.
Similarly Maguire, put in the post a few weeks ago after the sudden departure of two of Harry’s former press officers, appears to enjoy a low profile. A former military man, Maguire has known Harry for several years through his work as a trustee for Blesma, the charity for limbless veterans.
Meanwhile, Maines was on a short visit to London and Andreae was just one of several on her list of people to meet. In a previous role she reportedly ruled publicity for Netflix series The Crown with “an iron fist”.
So, was it leaked and why? Both sides claim innocence. Which brings us to the issue of why the meeting occurred at all. What many don’t realise, however, is that the meeting was the result of years of trying on Harry’s part to reconnect with the royal family. This latest attempt is the closest he has got so far, which is probably worth a picture.
So, why was a meeting granted now? From the King’s perspective, it helps that Harry’s court case against His Majesty’s government has come to an end. Charles cannot be co-opted into saying anything about a case where his son is using his father’s courts to sue his father’s government about a security decision. With that out of the way, the King is more open to hearing what his younger son has to say.
There’s another reason too. When Harry’s book, Spare, was published, the duke told Tom Bradby in a television interview that he wanted an apology from the royal family for all the hurt they had caused him and his wife. This repeated demand meant any possible meeting with the palace was doomed to fail and promptly rejected.
A source described the negotiations as including “untenable demands from the American side”. The King couldn’t possibly be left open to a tirade of abuse from his younger son, particularly after his cancer diagnosis.
But now it appears Harry has changed his objective. He is no longer publicly demanding an apology. A source who has known Harry well for several decades said: “He appears to be softening on his demand for an apology now. There seems to be a realisation that this is not going to be granted. The meeting may have been a chance to put it all behind them and move on.”
This concession on Harry’s part appears to have opened a channel whereby the palace is prepared to meet him. “Harry has made no secret of the fact that he wants to be reconciled,” says a well-placed source. “And he knows that talking and communication is by far the best way to go ahead.”
In other words, the damaging accusations – and threats of more to come – are now in the past. Or so they say. Perhaps he is finally growing up, knowing the door is likely to be permanently shut to him when his brother, Prince William, becomes king.
Others are less charitable. A well-placed observer described the meeting and its subsequent publicity as a “desperate” attempt by the duke to get back into the royal fold. With no discernible job, other than that of a supporting role to his highly driven and successful wife, Harry may well be realising what he has given up. He has said that he was left “devastated” by the decision to leave his charity, Sentebale, along with his co-founder and all the trustees, after a row with the chair.
Yet he still clings to what he has always known. Maines’s title, as head of Harry’s “household”, suggests the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have no interest in divorcing themselves from their previous royal lives. They continue to use their duke and duchess titles, as is their right. They are not, however, permitted to use their HRH titles. Meghan appeared to overstep when “HRH” was used on a card sent to a friend as a personal gift. Whether their children, Archie and Lilibet, will use their prince and princess titles will surely be a matter for them.
All this is to say that a very public link with the royal household is no bad thing for the Sussexes, at least from a PR perspective. Could the publicity help his case or at least show his brother that he is serious about reconciliation? It doesn’t hurt the King either, whose reluctance to see his son baffled some commentators. Similarly, the King comes across well from the meeting. But whether such a febrile truce can withstand such a major breach of discretion is uncertain.
The meeting is said to have “opened the channel of communication” between father and son for the first time in months. It is probably what Harry should have done in the first place rather than trying to have a dialogue through television networks, a million-dollar book deal and various podcasts and interviews.
But it prompts the question: What does Harry want? He clearly wants to see his father, who is still receiving regular cancer treatment. Yet he also wants to be welcomed back with open arms and to come and go in the UK as he pleases so he can stay in touch with his charities.
When it comes to rebuilding a relationship with his family, his past behaviour makes that tricky. Whether he likes it or not, dropping his demand for an apology may not be enough. It may now require one from him.
The Times
To join the conversation, please log in. Don't have an account? Register
Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout