included a striking anecdote: after being told to leave Frogmore Cottage, Harry is said to have asked his father, \u201cDon\u2019t you want to see your grandchildren again?\u201d Scobie is widely seen as sympathetic to the Sussexes, and the inclusion of that line underlined how deeply access to the children had become entangled with the wider dispute.<\/span><\/p>\nHarry later gave a television interview in which he said Meghan could not safely return to the UK, citing fears she could be targeted in an acid or knife attack.<\/p>\n
A friend of the King told me at the time: \u201cHarry has lost his security case in court, and he\u2019s now trying the emotional blackmail route to get what he wants instead, cynically using the threat of Archie and Lilibet never meeting their grandfather again as a tactic to coerce the King. It\u2019s truly appalling. The idea that the security forces are going to allow the Sussexes to be attacked by an acid-throwing or knife-wielding maniac on soil is absurd, and Harry knows it. Using it as leverage\u2026 is beyond contempt.\u201d<\/p>\n
Another long-standing family friend said: \u201cI wonder when they are older how those kids will feel about being denied a meaningful relationship with the King\u2026 If you force Charles to choose between his duty to the crown and his personal feelings, he will choose the crown every time, just as his mother did.\u201d<\/p>\n
At the time, another source\u2014once close to both brothers but now firmly aligned with William\u2014put it bluntly: \u201cWhen Harry was being kicked out of Frogmore Cottage, one of his lines was that Charles would never see the kids again. This is him going public with that threat.\u201d<\/p>\n
The last time Charles saw Archie and Lilibet in person was during the Platinum Jubilee in June 2022. Since then, contact is said to have been largely limited to video calls.<\/p>\n
Harry\u2019s allies have always rejected the charge of emotional blackmail, insisting the issue is safety. But they have never fully answered why a private visit within the royal security envelope could not be arranged if the sole objective was a family reunion.<\/p>\n
That is what makes the Sandringham angle so interesting. On the surface, it looks like an answer to that criticism\u2014Harry signalling he is willing to come to royal territory. But the detail suggests otherwise. It does not say he would automatically accept such an offer under current arrangements. It suggests he would consider it but that actually he just wants the kind of security triggered by a formal royal invitation\u2014and possibly more.<\/p>\n
The once-obscure Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC) has now become the central fault line in one of the most destructive royal family feuds in modern times.<\/p>\n
There was a period when Charles refused to speak to Harry at all because, as one palace source put it to me, it was constitutionally awkward that \u201cHis Majesty\u2019s son was suing His Majesty\u2019s government in His Majesty\u2019s court.\u201d<\/p>\n
There was also concern that any private conversation could later be used as evidence that the King supported restoring Harry\u2019s security, dragging the monarch into legal jeopardy.<\/p>\n
At the same time, Harry\u2019s side has long argued this is not really about security, but about control. One source described it to me as being about \u201cpower and control.\u201d<\/p>\n
People on the other side have privately acknowledged that the current system suits the palace perfectly well. The requirement for advance notice and tightly managed movements \u201csuits the palace down to the ground.\u201d<\/p>\n
Harry\u2019s camp has repeatedly questioned why Charles does not simply overrule the committee. The official answer is constitutional propriety. The reality, according to multiple sources over time, is that the palace does not want Harry and Meghan able to fly in and out at will or establish a quasi-royal presence in the U.K. while living outside the institution.<\/p>\n
There have, in fact, I can reveal, been discussions about possible invitations in the past\u2014efforts to explore whether Harry could spend time privately with the King at Sandringham or Balmoral. But I am told Harry has resisted arrangements that would confine him within the royal security bubble and limit his freedom of movement.<\/p>\n
It is hard to see how going public again helps.<\/p>\n
In essence, this looks like Harry pressing the nuclear button\u2014again. It is the same pressure point that blew everything up in 2024, when the language of \u201cemotional blackmail\u201d first took hold among the King\u2019s allies.<\/p>\n
The most plausible outcome remains some kind of strengthened hybrid arrangement: a slightly improved bespoke security package after advance notice, perhaps with more formal guarantees. A classic royal fudge.<\/p>\n
But the prospect of Harry regaining full, flexible security\u2014allowing him to come and go as he pleases\u2014still looks remote.<\/p>\n
And putting this fight back on the front page makes that outcome even less likely, hardening opposition and reinforcing the palace view that access to the King\u2019s grandchildren is once again being deployed as leverage in a conflict that has already caused immense damage.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\u2018 The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties \u2019 <\/em><\/p>\n \u2018 Some details of this article were extracted from the following source theroyalist.substack.com \u2019 <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Prince Harry has again been accused of using his children as leverage in his long-running battle over security, after a new report in The Sunday Times suggested he wants his protection reinstated so he can bring Meghan Markle and their two children to visit King Charles. As I flagged last night, the story, by Roya […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":2350089,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":[],"jnews_primary_category":[],"jnews_social_meta":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2350088","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-royalty"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Harrys-Sandringham-Offer-Revives-Bitter-Accusations-of-\u2018Using-the-Kings.com2Fpublic2Fimages2Ff9da7fe3-84f5-47bf-8597-5219e.jpeg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2350088","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2350088"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2350088\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2350090,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2350088\/revisions\/2350090"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2350089"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2350088"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2350088"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2350088"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}