Once again Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have whipped up a frenzy with the simple act of opening their mouths.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex released a statement on the unfolding situation in Afghanistan, Covid, and the humanitarian crisis in Haiti.
“The world is exceptionally fragile right now,” the couple wrote on their Archewell Foundation website. “As we all feel the many layers of pain due to the situation in Afghanistan, we are left speechless…”
Needless to say, the statement was ripped to shreds within hours of being published, with reports branding it a “woke word salad” that was completely “irrelevant”.
But it makes sense that the couple would break their silence, considering the core mission of Archwell is to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change”.
Harry served in the Army for ten years, rising to the rank of captain and undertaking two tours of Afghanistan (albeit undoubtedly protected due to his royal title).
‘Meghan and Harry’s Afghanistan stance isn’t the issue – point your finger at silent Blair’
The Sussexes’ announcement may have been de trop, but let’s not forget who started all of this, argues Liam Gilliver
Harry and Meghan released a statement yesterday about the “exceptionally fragile” state of the world
Harry and Meghan released a statement yesterday about the “exceptionally fragile” state of the world(Getty Images)
OPINIONBy Liam Gilliver
12:08, 18 Aug 2021UPDATED12:12, 18 Aug 2021
Once again Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have whipped up a frenzy with the simple act of opening their mouths.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex released a statement on the unfolding situation in Afghanistan, Covid, and the humanitarian crisis in Haiti.
“The world is exceptionally fragile right now,” the couple wrote on their Archewell Foundation website. “As we all feel the many layers of pain due to the situation in Afghanistan, we are left speechless…”
Needless to say, the statement was ripped to shreds within hours of being published, with reports branding it a “woke word salad” that was completely “irrelevant”.
But it makes sense that the couple would break their silence, considering the core mission of Archwell is to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change”.
Harry served in the Army for ten years, rising to the rank of captain and undertaking two tours of Afghanistan (albeit undoubtedly protected due to his royal title).
Prince Harry pictured in 2013 as he served in Afghanistan
Prince Harry pictured in 2013 as he served in Afghanistan(Getty Images)
He has also been involved in a number of projects helping service personnel, including volunteering with the Army’s Personnel Recovery Unit in London, trekking with wounded servicemen and women to the South Pole and in the Arctic, supporting a number of adventure challenges through his Endeavour Fund, and organising the Invictus Games.
It’s sad that these words of compassion need defending – there’s nothing controversial or disagreeable about them.
But even if you think the statement was completely inessential – let’s not lose track of how this all started.
Tony Blair has been pretty loud in recent years, joining Bill Gates in his calls to end vaccine apartheid penning a piece for the Financial Times of how we can vaccinate the world.
But since the troubles in Afghanistan started, Blair’s Twitter has become desolate and deafeningly silent. His last tweet, a sanctimonious thread on climate change, is now a very telling tumbleweed.
Tony Blair is yet to break his silence about the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan(Getty)
In 2001, Blair, with his very own voice, confirmed that British forces were involved in US-led military action against the Taliban.
A month after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York, Blair announced: “This is a moment to seize. The kaleidoscope has been shaken, the pieces are in flux.
Soon they will settle again. Before they do, let us reorder the world around us…”
However, it didn’t quite work out. The 20 years of war, which cost the UK tens of billions, led to thousands of Afghan civilians and more than 450 British army personnel being killed.
And as the government now announces plans to offer refuge to just 5,000 Afghans who may be at risk from the Taliban this year – people are angry.
Couldn’t this have been avoided? Were all those deaths in vain? What could that money have achieved if put elsewhere?
In the words of the Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MPs: “This disastrous situation in Afghanistan is a consequence more than anything of a twenty-year-long failed military intervention…
“The fact of the invasion, not the manner of its ending, has driven the crisis in Afghanistan.”
