Prince Harry is facing yet another wave of backlash and this time, royal insiders say his latest move has exposed a glaring contradiction in his ongoing security demands. During a fiery segment on The Sun’s Royal Exclusive show, TalkTV’s royal editor Sarah Hewson did not hold back, slamming the Duke of Sussex for what she called a confusing and contradictory stance on his personal safety.
Her main point of contention? Harry’s surprise visit to war-torn Ukraine, just days after complaining in court that the UK is “too unsafe” for his family.
“How can you go to Ukraine and suggest that you’re not safe to bring your family back to Britain?” Hewson asked incredulously, echoing what many critics and royal watchers are now thinking.
Harry’s short UK trip was tied to a two-day court hearing regarding his ongoing battle over taxpayer-funded police protection. During the hearing, Harry argued that the downgraded security he’s received since stepping back from royal duties in 2020 is “inadequate, inappropriate and ineffective.”
But just hours later, the prince jetted off to Ukraine—a country currently at war—to meet with disabled veterans and retired military personnel, raising serious questions about the sincerity and consistency of his concerns.
Joining the chorus of critics, The Sun’s royal editor Matt Wilkinson pointed out the inconsistency, asking, “Is he just going a bit over the top here? Why is he obsessed with the security?” He noted that Harry has traveled to the UK “many, many times” since stepping down as a senior royal, and yet continues to push the narrative that he is not safe on British soil.
Commentators on the panel suggested that the Home Office and even members of the Royal Family may be quietly wondering the same thing—why does Harry seem to lack trust in the UK’s ability to protect him, especially when he continues to make high-profile international trips without the same level of concern?
Read More: Kate Middleton and Prince William’s Shocking Move As They Will Skip Easter With the Royals
Critics also noted a striking hypocrisy in Harry’s behavior while passionately arguing that he and his family require armed police protection in Britain, he frequently stays in hotels during UK visits without any police presence. If his concerns were truly that dire, they argue, such casual travel arrangements would seem reckless and contradictory.
The backlash isn’t just about the optics—it’s about the message Harry is sending. On one hand, he insists that he cannot bring his children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, to the UK without full security guarantees. On the other hand, he’s voluntarily walking into active war zones, where the danger is arguably far more immediate and unpredictable.
This public scrutiny arrives at a time when Harry and Meghan continue to attract attention for their post-royal life, including legal battles, media ventures, and frequent criticisms of the monarchy. Royal watchers say the couple’s ongoing demands and dramatic narratives may be causing more damage than they realize.
Meanwhile, Harry’s surprise trip to Ukraine, though meaningful in intent, now appears overshadowed by the growing controversy.
What could have been a noble gesture to support wounded veterans has been clouded by confusion and criticism over the prince’s seemingly double standards.
And as the legal battle for security wages on, Harry’s public image remains in the crosshairs—not just of royal experts, but of the general public. For many, this latest contradiction raises one question louder than ever that Is Prince Harry fighting a battle for safety, or for control.
