Harry’s no to Carlo’s birthday? An invention of reason of state

However, it was the father himself who did not invite his son to Clarence House on November 14th

Of course it is possible that Carlo puts the reasons of state before those of the family. A king does this and more, if necessary, to the point of sacrificing a son for the kingdom. Whether it is Harry the rebel, rather than William the heir, the game becomes even easier and even without the aftermath of remorse, since the Duke of Sussex probably doesn’t care that much about attending his father’s birthday. Today’s news, as opposed to yesterday’s (according to which Harry snubbed his father’s invitation to the sovereign’s 75th birthday party), is that instead, it was the father himself who did not invite his son to Clarence House on November 14th.

The reason? That of distracting British public opinion, with a story bordering on gossip, from the failure of his trip to Kenya and which could be a prelude to a request for compensation for the mistakes of the British colonial past, which President William Ruto defined as “brutal and atrocious towards the African people.” While yesterday the Sunday Times reported that Prince Harry and his family had declined an invitation to the birthday party and would remain in California, today their spokesperson told the MailOnline that “no contact” has come from Buckingham Palace about the event next week, adding that, in any case, “the Duke will certainly find a way to privately wish Her Majesty a happy birthday, as he always has.”

God forbid if he didn’t do it this time too. But it is precisely here, and thanks to the timing with which the fault of the second royal son in rejecting the king’s invitation would have come to light, that the aforementioned and hypothesized reason of state comes into play: a friend of princes Harry and Meghan Markle, according to whom the Palace could have even leaked the story of the “snubbing” to divert attention from the recent visit of the British sovereign to Kenya and from the words of President Ruto, who bluntly stated that “there still remains much to do to achieve complete repairs.”

Whether there was an invitation or not and who is to blame, Harry or Charles, in not wanting to meet, and also whether or not there is a reason of state superior to the family (even the royal one), In the end, it doesn’t matter that much. Because, as always, the facts will prevail and, barring last-minute surprises, Harry, Meghan and little Archie and Lilibet will not go to the king’s party. The long-awaited olive branch of the father’s reconciliation with his son, to be handed out on November 14, never existed, while – this is also a fact, and it is the clearest of all – it remains firmly in its usual place the royal scepter.