Prince Harry blames the Uganda-Invictus mess on the palace’s clarification letter

I do not recall a time in the past seven years where the Sussex team has been so quick to get so involved in the royal story of the day. There’s an eagerness to get the Sussexes’ side out through briefings which we simply haven’t seen from them before now. Speaking of, Team Sussex had a response to all of the British media’s inquiries about Uganda possibly pulling out of the Birmingham Invictus Games. You see, the Ugandan president’s son, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, announced on Twitter that Uganda will not participate in any event without King Charles’ approval. He then told the Times of London: “I have factions in the Ministry of Defence that support that Harry-Meghan nonsense. I had to quash it straight away. I support the monarch. Period.” As I said in my coverage yesterday, it doesn’t even sound like a formal withdrawal from Invictus, it sounds like some random general is polishing his royalist-bootlicker medal. Well, Team Sussex spoke to ITV’s Chris Ship and it’s like they’re pouring gasoline on a fire.

Uganda has pulled it’s participation from Prince Harry’s Invictus Games – so is this week’s public letter from Buckingham Palace about Harry’s status to blame?

The question has come about following a tweet from the chief of Uganda’s defence forces. On X, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba posted that “Uganda hereby withdraws from the Invictus Games” because he did not want the country’s participation to be “construed as being opposed to His Majesty King Charles III of the United Kingdom, whom we deeply revere”. The general, who is also the son of Uganda’s president, said: “We shall not participate in anything that does not have His Majesty’s approval.”

Uganda is the most recent country to join the Invictus Games movement and a delegation from the country’s defence forces was personally welcomed by Prince Harry when he was in London in July.

Harry’s office was quick to link the decision by General Kainerugaba to the letter made public by Buckingham Palace about the status of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on Monday. The Lord Chamberlain, the most senior courtier in the Royal Household, issued the guidance following the return to the UK of the Sussexes. The letter made it clear that any charitable work by Harry and Meghan is “a personal matter for them and undertaken in their private capacity.”

Whether or not that guidance influenced the Invictus decision by the Ugandans, we can’t be sure.

But a source close to Prince Harry said: “Intended or unintended, this is clearly a consequence of the Lord Chamberlain’s guidance regarding the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, that was rushed out without consultation on Monday.”

ITV News approached the Ugandan government and asked for clarification on the decision to withdraw its team from the Invictus Games. Government spokesperson, Alan Kasujja, said General Kainerugaba “speaks for the UPDF (Uganda People’s Defence Forces)”.

“There’s no higher authority in the military besides the president. Until he changes his position, consider it the position of the military,” Kasujja told ITV News.

However, the spokesperson did not know why the decision was made and if it was related to the Buckingham Palace letter. At the time, the palace said the letter was made public simply to clarify Harry and Meghan’s status in the UK for military and government departments. But Prince Harry’s office now believes the decision about Invictus by the Ugandans is directly linked to this week’s developments. It’s understood the Invictus Games Foundation has been told the palace letter has created some “confusion” within the Ugandan defence department.

There is no suggestion King Charles does not support the Invictus Games, which Prince Harry founded for wounded and sick military personnel and veterans. The King was at the inaugural Invictus Games in London in 2014 and is said to be very proud of his youngest son’s achievements. A senior royal source noted on Wednesday that the King supports all organisations which work to support wounded service personnel.

[From ITV]

It’s clear that Harry is very upset about the palace’s status-clarification letter – Team Sussex went to the Telegraph to explain why the wording and the timing of the letter “rankled” them so much. And now this, blaming the letter (and the palace) for sowing division within the Invictus community. Harry is, in essence, trying to lay the blame at his father’s feet. Here’s the thing: I have no doubt that we don’t even know the half of what the Windsors are doing to hurt Invictus. I think it’s likely that Invictus is one of the biggest reasons for the Sussexes’ move, even if they refuse to say that out loud. But this particular case with blaming the palace for what sounds like a deeply eccentric Ugandan general… this is not the test case, you know? This is not the moment to point at the palace machinery and cry shenanigans. I’m coming across as the Goldilocks of comms advice, I know – I’ve wanted the Sussexes’ comms to be more proactive and vocal for years, and now that they are, I’m like “hm, maybe y’all should have waited a week to get all of the facts.”

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.