Prince Harry has sparked fresh controversy after insisting he remains a 'working royal' during ahigh-profile visit to Ukraine this week, a claim that has drawn sharp rebukes from critics who point to his formal departure from the monarchy six years ago. Speaking to ITV royal editor Chris Ship, the Duke of Sussex rejected the notion that he has abandoned his official station, asserting that his current humanitarian efforts are a direct continuation of the role he was born to perform.
The news came after a period of prolonged tension regarding the Duke's status within the royal hierarchy. It can be recalled thatHarry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, famously stepped back as senior members of the Royal Family in 2020. At the time, the couple released a statement detailing their intention to carve out a progressive new role, seeking financial independence while balancing their time between the United Kingdom and North America. However, the practicalities of that transition have remained a point of public and constitutional friction ever since the couple relocated to California.
During his time in Ukraine, Harry was asked directly about his standing, prompted by ongoing debates over whether his independent activities carry the weight of the Crown. 'No. I will always be part of the Royal Family,' the Duke told the reporter. 'I am here working, doing the things that I was born to do.' He explained that he finds genuine fulfilment in these international trips, noting that he values the opportunity to bring attention to humanitarian issues that frequently drop out of the news cycle when the media's fickle gaze shifts elsewhere.
Harry really is seven layers of stupid. “I’m Royal and I work so I’m a working Royal”. No, precious flower, you’re not. You do NOT represent the Monarch, you do NOT represent the Commonwealth, you do NOT perform official duties.Does he NOT remember writing a whole book about…pic.twitter.com/YYfEWb9iXA
However, the Duke's self-classification has not sat well with traditionalists or royal observers. On social media, the reaction was swift and largely unforgiving. One critic on X argued that Harry's claims are fundamentally at odds with the reality of his 2020 exit, stating that 'No, you're not. You do NOT represent the Monarch, you do NOT represent the Commonwealth, you do NOT perform official duties.' The user noted the irony of Harry's current stance, suggesting he had previously complained about the expectations of the life he was born into, only to now insist on his status as a working royal when it suits his public profile.
The friction lies in the distinction between private philanthropy and the official 'work' of the British sovereign. Through their Archewell Foundation, Harry and Meghan have maintained a robust schedule of charitable work, focusing on veterans, mental health, and women's rights. For the Sussexes, this is the essence of service. For their detractors, however, it is a private venture that lacks the accountability and constitutional mandate of the working firm.
Another critic suggested that Harry's insistence on the title is essentially a demand for the privilege he enjoyed before moving to the United States. They noted that while royalty is respected as a courtesy in America, particularly for figures like the late Queen or King Charles, it is not a formal status that carries weight in a republic. The critic described Harry's position as a desire to reclaim the benefits of his former life while remaining largely outside its restrictions.
Despite the backlash, the Duke remains firm. His recent comments suggest he views his royal identity not as a job description that can be resigned, but as an inherent trait.
Source: International Business Times UK
