If this book is an attempt to divide Charles and William it is going to fail, says Ingrid Seward
IF the Sussexes hoped to be invited to Christmas at Sandringham this year then they may now find their invitation gets lost in the post.
The latest book from Harry and Meghan’s favourite reporter, Omid Scobie, sets out to reveal moments of which the Royal Family should be “ashamed”.
It weaves a narrative that King Charles and eldest son William are increasingly at odds — with the Prince of Wales seeing his father as a “transitional monarch”.
Scobie writes they have “clashing approaches and opinions”, with the King seemingly snubbed when William failed to include him in his environmental Earthshot Prize.
If this is an attempt to drive a wedge between father and son then it will almost certainly fail.
Just this week, both men put on a united front with a state banquet to entertain the President of the Republic of South Korea and his wife during a three-day visit to London.
It was important both diplomatically and financially and the King relied on his son and daughter-in-law Catherine to do their bit — which of course they did.
As South Korea is to invest more than £20billion in green energy and infrastructure projects and negotiate free trade deals, father and son knew the importance of making the visit a success.
At the Buckingham Palace banquet, the King was one side of the President and the Princess of Wales was the other.
William, meanwhile, sat next to the President’s wife Kim Keon Hee.
Not easy with language difficulties but all part of the great show of diplomacy on behalf of the Government.
Prince Harry once told me he couldn’t see the point of state banquets as everyone looked thoroughly bored, couldn’t talk to each other as they didn’t speak the same language and spent most of the time staring at their plates.
How unlike his brother William, who Scobie claims has become “institutionalised by the monarchy”, with the system churning out “a disciplined King in waiting”.
This is not the case. Prince William has always made it clear he won’t do things the same way as his father, but since adulthood has had a great respect for the institution of the monarchy.
He has no desire to take his father’s place until he has to.
He has seen how hard his father works and how restricted he is now he is King and is more than happy to assist him as much as he possibly can in his role.
He is delighted he does not have to take on the responsibility himself.
Yes, they hold differing views on the monarchy.
On the one hand you have Charles, who is steeped in tradition and determined to do things the way he always has.
On the other you have William, almost 35 years younger, who has a completely different way of seeing and doing things.
That he may see his father as a “transitional monarch” is not an insult.
By its very nature, monarchy is transitional.
It is an inherited role and in modern times there is no fight for the crown — one King or Queen immediately transfers to the next in line.
Each time there is a new monarch things change as they have to.
But Prince William has certainly not become institutionalised. His father took great care of that.
When William was accused of being lazy and not pulling his weight as he took on no royal duties, his father explained William and Kate needed time to enjoy as normal a family life as possible.
They managed to do just that and have three children before he was obliged to take on duties just before the birth of Prince Louis.
It was Charles’ blueprint for his eldest son and heir.
Scobie also accuses Charles of “ineptitude” in his handling of the Harry and Meghan saga.
His opinion is just an opinion.
None of us know exactly what was said when Charles spoke to Harry after the revelations in the Duke’s book Spare.
But it was bound to be an awkward conversation and also almost certainly “cold and brief”.
Charles is obviously upset and hurt by his son and daughter-in-law’s actions and attitude, but I don’t think he broods over it.
Until there is a solution, he doesn’t have the time.
He almost certainly referred to Harry as “that fool”. It is what any father might say of a son who behaves in the way Harry has done.
Before Harry and Meghan broadcast their woes, the Royal Family has always closed ranks when things go wrong.
They still do and are careful not to discuss anything outside of the family even with their closest aides.
That way there is little chance of misinformed, malicious gossip leaking out.
As the late Prince Philip once said: “You’re never quite sure. A small indiscretion can lead to all sorts of difficulties.”
It does — but it is impossible to know what is fact and fiction.
It is easy to suppose, for instance, that as Scobie says, William has a “combustible anger” — as is described in detail by Harry in his book when the brothers have a fight in the kitchen.
And of course, William is difficult to handle.
He is a complicated character, but he is not “emotionally cold” and neither is he a “hot-headed company man who has embraced the draconian tactics of an often vicious institution”.
In Harry’s mind, his brother is all these things and he has told us so through his book.
He used to be the one who was close to his father. Now the tables have turned.
And although Charles and William have different outlooks, there is never any jealousy on his father’s part of William’s achievements.
He is proud of William for his environmental causes — especially Earthshot — and never expected or wanted to be acknowledged for his influence.
Charles learned to care about the environment from his father and in turn passed on his knowledge to his children with joy.
Charles is proud of his eldest son. He is far too wise to let any disunity spread by malicious gossip affect their relationship.
It just won’t work.
He is secure in William’s loyalty. His son has a well-developed sense of obligation and responsibility to his family.
I am sure Charles looks forward to the day that Harry develops this too.
- Ingrid Seward is a royal biographer and editor in Chief of Majesty magazine.