Prince Harry Apparently Wants Archie and Lilibet to Have the Option of Becoming Working Royals
Prince Harry apparently wants to leave the door open for his kids, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, to possibly be working royals someday, should they choose to do so.
A new report explores Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to use Archie and Lilibet's prince and princess titles and HRH statuses.
It also explains that their U.K. passports may have been delayed amid a reluctance to put their HRH titles and Sussex surname on them.Five years after stepping back as working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle still retain their HRH titles (shorthand for His or Her Royal Highness), and, while they don't use them publicly, have used them privately, as came out earlier this year.
Harry and Meghan's kids, 6-year-old Prince Archie and 4-year-old Princess Lilibet, also have HRH titles, and, according to Town & Country, the Duke of Sussex wants to leave the option open for his kids to become working royals themselves someday, should they choose to do so.
A new report in The Guardian details Harry's efforts to get U.K. passports for Archie and Lilibet, with the surname Sussex (as Meghan has expressed the desire to use for herself, as well) and the HRH titles as well. Archie's passport, for example, was originally issued as Archie Mountbatten-Windsor (the surname the larger royal family uses) upon his birth in 2019, but after Archie's grandfather King Charles took the throne in 2022, he and Lilibet became entitled to use prince and princess titles. Harry and Meghan first expressed their intent to use said titles in March 2023, six months after Charles became King, on the occasion of Lilibet's christening. 'The children's titles have been a birthright since their grandfather became monarch,' a spokesperson for Harry and Meghan said at the time.
There was a delay in issuing U.K. passports for Archie and Lilibet and 'There was clear reluctance to issue passports for the kids,' a source 'close to the Sussexes' told The Guardian, with the insider adding that 'the King hadn't wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names.'
The Guardian reported that Harry 'wants to keep the HRH titles for his children so that when they grow older they can decide for themselves whether they want to become working royals or stay out of public life.'
As far back as the volatile Sandringham Summit in early 2020, Buckingham Palace said that 'The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the royal family.' That said, at least Meghan still uses her HRH title in a private capacity. The Guardian also reported that Harry and Meghan considered changing their surname to Spencer before landing on Sussex, which the outlet said stemmed from 'sheer exasperation' on Harry's part. After speaking about the matter with his uncle Earl Charles Spencer—Princess Diana's younger brother—though he was 'enthusiastic and supportive of the name change,' he advised against doing so because of legal reasons, and Harry and Meghan chose Sussex instead, reflective of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles given to them by Queen Elizabeth on the occasion of their 2018 wedding.
'Harry was at a point where British passports for his children with their updated Sussex surnames were being blocked with a string of excuses over the course of five months,' a source speaking to The Guardian said.
Per People, the passports for Archie and Lilibet eventually arrived nearly six months after the initial application; for context, standard processing time is typically around three weeks. The passports arrived 'shortly after the Sussexes' lawyers wrote to the U.K. Home Office, threatening to file a data subject access request—a legal move that could have revealed internal discussions or decisions behind the delay,' People reported.
Read the original article on InStyle
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
King Charles, Prince Harry at point of 'no turning back' as monarch refuses reconciliation: expert
As King Charles prepares to put on a united front with his family at this year's Trooping the Colour, the monarch and estranged son Prince Harry are nowhere near ending their rift. "There is no turning back," British royals expert Hilary Fordwich claimed to Fox News Digital. "King Charles remains tender towards his son but can't risk communication," she shared. "Prince William now has absolutely no interest in mending fences. Those close to the king say he [shouldn't] make peace with Harry in a way that would burden Prince William's future reign. The animosity is so deep that William has shut the door on Harry. Charles is not willing to go against his heir's wishes." King Charles, Prince Harry's Painful Feud 'Damaging' Monarch's Reign As Gutted Son Remains Furious: Expert "Everything comes down to trust and the lack of it," Fordwich added. Fordwich's comments came shortly after insiders told People magazine that the monarch, who is battling an undisclosed form of cancer, is hesitant to reconnect with his son. Many royal observers believe it's the monarch who should take the first step in igniting a royal reconciliation. Read On The Fox News App "The underlying issue is trust," royal biographer Sally Bedell Smith told the outlet. "The king and William don't trust Harry and Meghan with any kind of confidential conversation." Insiders told the outlet that the king, 76, isn't surrounded by palace aides urging him to reconcile with his son. Meanwhile, William is said to have "no interest" in extending an olive branch. "There is not a good angel in [the king's] ear to say, 'Be a good dad and make the first move,'" royal author Valentine Low told the outlet. Fox News Digital reached out to Buckingham Palace for comment. WATCH: PRINCE HARRY LOOKING TO RECONCILE WITH KING CHARLES, ROYAL FAMILY Fordwich claimed that Harry has crossed such a deep line in Charles's eyes that it's been difficult for the king to forgive his son. Sources close to Harry previously claimed to People magazine that Charles won't respond to his letters or phone calls. "It's Harry's criticisms of Queen Camilla [in his memoir, 'Spare'], as well as his broader attacks on the family and institution, which have seriously crossed a line for the king and those closest to him," Fordwich claimed. "The king is now so puzzled by Harry's constant revelations. It's now beyond sensitive to discuss, so he avoids all interaction regarding the subject. He is so kind but overwhelmed and has quite enough on his plate to deal with, without all this from his son." Harry's troubled relationship with his family and the U.K. establishment has played out in public for years – in books, interviews, TV programs and the courts. Harry and his wife, Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, stepped back as senior royals in 2020, citing the unbearable intrusions of the British press and a lack of support from the palace. That same year, they moved to California. Since the couple's royal exit, they have aired their grievances and made blistering allegations against the royal family. Harry's explosive 2023 memoir, "Spare," was stuffed with private details and embarrassing revelations. Click Here To Sign Up For The Entertainment Newsletter Harry's rift with his family burst into the open once more with a raw interview he gave to the BBC in May after losing a court case over his security. In a long and at times emotional conversation, Harry said he wanted reconciliation. He admitted that his father, who is battling an undisclosed form of cancer, won't speak to him. "Harry's ill-timed recent interview on the BBC highlighted the lack of trust between them publicly," royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams told Fox News Digital. "He seemed to believe his father could and should solve the issue of security, which he insists he and his family should have." "The rift, sadly, seems likely to remain toxic as there is no mutual trust between them," said Fitzwilliams. "Hopefully, it will not worsen as the Sussexes could give further interviews or possibly write more about the feud, something that is invariably remunerative for them." Low told People magazine that despite Harry's call for peace on the BBC, his comments were seen as another blow to the royals. During the interview, Harry, who has met his father only once, briefly, since his diagnosis early last year, said, "I don't know how much longer my father has." "It wasn't meant to be an attack, but it would be seen as one," said Low. "It makes Charles reaching out even harder." Royal expert Ian Pelham Turner told Fox News Digital that the royals take great pride in protecting their public image. They've maintained the late Queen Elizabeth II's motto of keep calm and carry on. Like What You're Reading? Click Here For More Entertainment News "The royals play a positive role to the cameras," he explained. "[But] behind the scenes, they allegedly are constantly bickering with each other… King Charles has a past reputation for not making advances on difficult decisions." A source recently claimed to Us Weekly that William was "absolutely appalled" by Harry's comments to the BBC about their father's health. The insider claimed that the 42-year-old feels like Harry stooped "so low." Royal experts previously told Fox News Digital that William is fiercely protective of Charles. The source also told the outlet that it's unlikely that the feuding brothers will reunite while their father is still alive. "The funeral of Charles would be the first time that courtiers would imagine [them reuniting]," said the insider. "I can't imagine William would invite Harry to his coronation." Despite infrequent updates from the palace about his health, Charles has returned to a full slate of public duties. During his sit-down with the BBC, Harry held out little hope of another meeting with his father. "The only time I come back to the U.K. is, sadly, for funerals or court cases," he said. Fitzwilliams said that Charles must address his ongoing rift with Harry, 40, as it remains a dark cloud over his reign. "We are now less than a fortnight away from Trooping the Colour, which celebrates the monarch's birthday," he said. "King Charles can surely congratulate himself on negotiating a year where he has worked so hard and achieved a great deal despite battling cancer." "The one area that remains problematic is the rift with the Sussexes. He has only seen Prince Harry once after his diagnosis and then fleetingly." Back in 2024, Christopher Andersen, author of "The King," claimed to Fox News Digital that the king is still unable to forgive his son for casting Camilla as the villain in "Spare." "I think people have to realize that the one thing that Charles finds unforgivable is criticism of Camilla," said Andersen at the time. "There's no criticism of Camilla," Andersen claimed. "And unfortunately for Harry… Harry said some pretty devastating things about her. He made it clear that he felt she was… the villain in the piece. I think that still bothers the king, and I don't know that it will be easy for him to [forgive]. I don't think they'll ever forgive Harry for that." WATCH: PRINCE HARRY'S JABS AT QUEEN CAMILLA UNFORGIVABLE FOR KING CHARLES: EXPERT "[He's] on his own," Andersen added, referring to the Duke of Sussex. In televised interviews to promote the book, Harry accused his stepmother, 77, of leaking private conversations to the media to burnish her own reputation. He accused members of the royal family of getting "into bed with the devil" to gain favorable tabloid coverage, singling out Camilla's efforts to rehabilitate her image with the public after her longtime affair with his father. "That made her dangerous because of the connections that she was forging within the British press," Harry told CBS ahead of his book launch. "There was open willingness on both sides to trade information. And with a family built on hierarchy, and with her on the way to being queen consort, there was going to be people or bodies left in the street." The Duke and Duchess of Sussex reside in the wealthy coastal city of Montecito with their two young article source: King Charles, Prince Harry at point of 'no turning back' as monarch refuses reconciliation: expert
USA Today
9 hours ago
- USA Today
Navy sailor's dog was given away while he served. Social media led to a reunion
Navy sailor's dog was given away while he served. Social media led to a reunion Show Caption Hide Caption Brave military duo reunites for best reason After being deployed in South Korea, retired military working dog Akim found his forever home in Kirtland AFB with handler Senior Airman Jenna Canada. Militarykind, USA TODAY When Paulo Silva returned home from Navy combat deployment in the Middle East, he discovered his beloved dog Archie was gone. What happened next shows how social media can be a positive, unifying force. Archie, a 5-year-old golden retriever had been entrusted to a relative in New Jersey, while Silva was serving an eight-month stint aboard the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman. 'A family member that was well-trusted felt they had no choice but to give away my dog,' Silva, who lives in Virginia and enlisted in the Navy in 2014, told the Asbury Park Press, part of the USA TODAY Network. 'At no point was I told about it and I had asked time and time again about him. I was told he was having good days and bad days, but he was hanging in there." The relative gave Archie away, Silva said, because "they said my dog wasn't settling in too well – that he was having problems staying at the house. But I've had numerous people look after my dog before, with no issue.' Silva's dismay grew to heartbreak when he asked the relative for Archie's whereabouts. 'They refused to give me the contact information of the person who has my dog,' Silva said. So he turned to Facebook, posting a plea for help. 'This dog isn't just a pet to me," Silva wrote. "He is my heart, my companion, and a piece of my soul that helped carry me through some of the hardest times in my life." More: Pet health care prices are so high that most owners are skipping treatments Within a day, he said, crowdsourcing helped him find Archie. The sad story now has a happy ending. 'I'm very happy to share that Archie has safely returned to me,' Silva wrote. 'I want to sincerely thank the family who has been caring for him during this time. Your kindness, care, and love for Archie have not gone unnoticed, and I am deeply grateful for everything you've done. I appreciate the time and effort you've given to ensure his well-being.' Silva said to show his appreciation, he connected the family to a golden retriever breeder, which has offered to donate a puppy to the family. "I can't thank them enough for being so supportive in this situation," Silva said in a follow-up interview on June 5. On Facebook, he implored the public to stop blaming the family who had cared for the dog after an initial misunderstanding about whether they would return Archie. "The family is not at fault, and I believe we can all agree that it's time to put this chapter behind us for the sake of everyone involved, especially Archie," Silva said. Silva said he's "speechless" by the "overwhelming" amount of support he's gotten throughout the ordeal. 'Thank you to everyone who has shown support throughout this situation,' he posted on Facebook. 'I am incredibly grateful for the love and care our community has shown, and I'm happy to bring Archie home where he belongs.' Jerry Carino is community columnist for the Asbury Park Press, focusing on the Jersey Shore's interesting people, inspiring stories and pressing issues. Contact him at jcarino@
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
A Royal Navy Nuclear Submarine Is Being Scrapped For The First Time
The former U.K. Royal Navy nuclear-powered attack submarine HMS Swiftsure has begun to be cut up as part of its scrapping process. Remarkably, this is the first British nuclear-powered submarine of any kind to be fully dismantled and decommissioned. This means that all the rest of the Royal Navy's out-of-commission nuclear-powered subs are currently sitting in docks awaiting disposal, a process that is only now starting to happen, after years of stasis. Babcock International Group, a British aerospace, defense, and nuclear engineering services company, recently announced that the first major cut had been made on the exterior of Swiftsure. This involved the removal of the submarine's fin (or sail), after which it was lowered to the bottom of the dry dock, a process seen in the photo at the top of this story. HMS Swiftsure was the lead ship of a class of nuclear fleet submarines built for the Royal Navy. Entering service in 1973, the submarine served until 1992. A highly notable episode in its service came in 1977, when Swiftsure penetrated undetected through layered escort screens of destroyers and frigates and approached the Soviet Navy aircraft carrier Kiev. The submarine recorded extremely valuable acoustic signatures and took detailed underwater periscope pictures of the Soviet carrier's hull and propellers, something you can read about in more detail here. Swiftsure is being disposed of at Rosyth in Scotland, under the Submarine Dismantling Project (SDP). The submarine is serving as a demonstrator for the broader SDP, which will eventually dispose of the Royal Navy's other out-of-commission nuclear subs, which include both attack submarine (SSN) and ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) classes. The work on Swiftsure is being carried out by Babcock in collaboration with the Ministry of Defense's Defense Nuclear Enterprise, contractor KDC Veolia Decommissioning Services UK Ltd, and Rolls-Royce. Up to 90 percent of Swiftsure (by total weight) is being recycled, with at least some of the high-grade steel being repurposed into components for future Royal Navy submarines. 'The project showcases our commitment to sustainable disposal practices,' explained Lorraine Russell, Senior Responsible Owner for the Submarine Disposals Program. 'By recycling materials wherever possible, we're ensuring these vessels that served the nation so well continue to provide value even after decommissioning.' The plan calls for Swiftsure to be fully dismantled by the end of 2026, making it the first U.K. nuclear-powered submarine to be fully disposed of. After the process has been proven out, Babcock will then lead work on the long-term dismantling of the backlog of other nuclear-powered subs, which are laid up in Rosyth and in Devonport, in southwest England. According to Navy Lookout, a website providing independent Royal Navy news and analysis, there are currently 16 decommissioned nuclear-powered subs in Devonport and seven more in Rosyth (including Swiftsure). The other boats in Rosyth include HMS Dreadnought, which was the U.K.'s first nuclear-powered submarine, commissioned into service in 1963 and finally withdrawn in 1980. This means the boat has been in storage longer than it was in service. At Devonport, notably, the naval base has a regular capacity for a maximum of 14 submarines. This means that special permission had to be granted to add another two subs (HMS Talent and Triumph, which arrived in 2023 and 2024). This provides further evidence of the urgency in starting the long-term disposal of these boats. Of the boats in Devonport, 12 still have their nuclear fuel on board. The submarines are stored afloat in a non-tidal basin. Every 15 years, each boat goes into dry dock for an inspection and preservation work, where necessary. At Rosyth, there is even less available space, especially bearing in mind the need for the base to accommodate the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers when they go into dry dock. That the United Kingdom has such a big backlog of nuclear-powered subs awaiting disposal reflects the fact that so many of these boats were withdrawn from service relatively rapidly with the end of the Cold War. During these times of tension, the priority was to build up underwater capabilities, with less thought given to what would be done with the nuclear-powered submarines once they were no longer needed. At one point, it was even suggested that the boats should be filled with ballast and sunk in deep water, but such at-sea disposal of nuclear material was banned in 1983. Not only does the long-term storage of nuclear-powered submarines present very serious safety and security challenges, but keeping storing and maintaining the boats is also a considerable economic investment. This is in stark contrast to the United States. The U.S. Navy has always had a bigger fleet of nuclear-powered submarines than the Royal Navy and its construction program is coupled with a decommissioning effort to deal with the boats once they are removed from service. The U.S. Department of Defense explains the decommissioning process — specifically at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard & Intermediate Maintenance Facility in Bremerton, Washington — as follows: Currently, the shipyard receives a steady flow of decommissioned Los Angeles class attack submarines that are brought in for the recycling process, which can take up to two years to complete. Dismantling starts along the pier, where the subs remain afloat. Ladders used by sailors are removed, stairs are added to give workers easier access, and holes are punched into the sub's hull so cranes can be lowered to pull out scrap metal. The crews bring in their own electrical power and ventilation piping because the vessels are no longer functional. The forward and aft ends of each submarine are then separated from the already defueled reactor compartment, which is then closed at each end with massive steel encasements. PSNS & IMF is the only naval shipyard that can make robust steel encasements large enough and with the safety requirements needed to hold the empty reactor cores. The giant cases are pieced together by expert welders using submerged-arc welding, technology not used anywhere else in the Navy. Part of the recycling team's work includes filling large bins with items such as insulation, circuit boards, electrical components, cabling, and other debris that is sent to different waste streams. The contents of the bins are sent to contractors who will either melt down the scraps, reuse them, sell them, or send them out for environmentally safe disposal. As parts are removed, the subs slowly rise out of the water. Visitors on the pier can see water lines on the subs from where they initially sat when they were at their operational weight. Once in dry dock, it takes another 10 months to break down a sub to where all that's left is the empty reactor compartment. The dry dock is where that heavy recycling process takes place. Parts of the ship that are too big to remove along the pier, such as the diesel generator, are removed during this phase. Large chunks of the submarine's main structure are also ripped apart and deposited onto barges at the pier for disposal as scrap metal. The shipyard itself also reuses some of the material. The defueled nuclear reactor compartment is all that is left. They are placed in robust shipping packages consistent with federal and state regulations and shipped to the Department of Energy's Hanford Site in Hanford, Washington. The packages make the 700-mile journey by barge from the shipyard in Bremerton down the Washington coast and up the Columbia River before being transported on a multi-wheeled transporter to the site for safe, permanent disposal. As of March 2025, more than 140 reactor compartment disposal packages had been transported by PSNS & IMF to the Hanford Site since 1986, reflecting the huge scale of the decommissioning effort. It's only more recently that the United Kingdom started a similar kind of disposal project for its unwanted nuclear subs. While Swiftsure will be the first Royal Navy submarine to be fully dismantled and decommissioned, Babcock is now also under contract to prepare for the nuclear defueling of four Trafalgar class SSNs. Nuclear defueling has been done before in the United Kingdom — all seven of the boats at Rosyth have had their fuel removed, and of the 16 boats at Devonport, four are also without fuel. However, the work on the four Trafalgar class SSNs will be the first nuclear defueling of a decommissioned Royal Navy submarine in over 20 years. According to Navy Lookout, until 2003, nuclear subs had their fuel removed soon after decommissioning, but this process was abandoned after it was determined that the facilities for doing this work were no longer safe enough. As an interim measure, these submarines had their primary circuit chemically treated to ensure it remains inert and were fitted with additional radiation-monitoring equipment. 'This meant fully fueled boats have been stored afloat for the last two decades while a solution was developed at a glacial pace,' Navy Lookout reported yesterday. 'The submarines that have not had fuel removed have their reactor primary circuit chemically treated to guarantee it remains inert, and additional radiation monitoring equipment is fitted.' To make the defueling process safer, the previous cranes used to remove the fuel have been replaced with a so-called Reactor Access House. Moving on rails, this is an enclosure that is positioned over the submarine in a dry dock, after which the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) is hoisted into it. The largest and most radioactive element of the submarine, the RPV is then transported to the Sellafield nuclear site for above-ground storage. Longer-term, it's expected that the RPVs will be buried underground, but this plan has yet to be finalized. Here again, there are differences with the U.S. approach, as Alex Luck, an analyst who closely follows submarine developments, told TWZ: '[Decommissioned U.S. Navy submarines] get defuelled, and the remaining material goes to Idaho for processing and then storage. The reactors and all associated elements are cut up and put into special waste storage sites. Unlike the United Kingdom, the United States simply disposes of a lot of material by burying it. The United Kingdom, on the other hand, is reprocessing and recycling as much as possible due to their far more limited capacity/tighter regulations for 'buried,' i.e., long-term stored waste.' Regardless, once the RPVs are removed, the submarines can start to be fully broken down, as is now happening with Swiftsure at Rosyth. While there was already some urgency to develop a plan to finally dispose of decommissioned nuclear-powered submarines, the problem is only set to grow in the years to come. The four Vanguard class SSBNs that entered service in the 1990s and currently comprise the United Kingdom's permanent at-sea deterrent are scheduled to be taken out of service between 2031 and 2040. These will be replaced by a similar number of new Dreadnought class SSBNs. The four Dreadnought boats represent one of the most important U.K. defense programs in many years, and you can read more about their design here. Beyond that, starting in the late 2030s, the United Kingdom will have to dispose of seven Astute class SSNs. These will be replaced by an increased fleet of up to 12 SSNs, to be developed under the SSN-AUKUS in collaboration with Australia and the United States, in a plan that was outlined in the Strategic Defense Review earlier this week. Despite these plans for expansion, the Royal Navy's submarine fleet will remain a shadow of its numerical strength back in its Cold War heyday. For many years, the growing backlog of retired nuclear-powered submarines stood testament to that period of naval power. Now, with the milestone cutting of the exterior of Swiftsure, this increasingly problematic and costly legacy is starting to be dealt with. Contact the author: thomas@
