He wants his father back.

And also his brother.

At least that's what Prince Harry says in an interview that will be broadcast on Sunday evening on the British broadcaster ITV at 10 p.m. German time.

Shortly thereafter, the American broadcaster CBS also shows an interview with Harry, in which he accuses the royal family of not keeping private matters private.

The motto of the Windsors is "Never complain, never explain", a mantra that is said to go back to Queen Elizabeth II's mother, Queen Mum.

But in Harry and Meghan's case, this only applied to the extent that first people (unspecified in the CBS interview) gave details to the press,

Peter Philipp Schmitt

Editor in the department "Germany and the World".

  • Follow I follow

With this, Harry once again directly attacks his father, King Charles III, whom he is said to want to win back for himself, and his brother, the heir to the throne Prince William.

With statements that are deliberately kept vague.

Someone did something.

But who exactly remains unsaid.

Racism in the royal family?

There is, claim the Sussexes.

And put the whole family under general suspicion.

Worse, they attack the institution and the monarch with their visors down, which has always been inseparable for Elizabeth II.

At the same time, however, they also hurt Harry's closest relatives, the Mountbatten-Windsors as a whole, and they also feel that they are right.

Again and again the Sussexes have stepped in (why, when they could just live their new independent lives?), deliberately isolating themselves, turning down invitations from the palace and family.

What led to the behind-the-scenes arguments over why Meghan miscarried, William "physically" attacked his brother, Catherine burst into tears at a dress fitting with Meghan, all of which is not really known.

Much of it occurs in the best of families, is also ugly, perhaps reprehensible, but is not usually broached in public.

Only if you're doing it for one purpose: publicity, even if it hurts other people.

Actually, the allegations would hardly be worth mentioning

There is only one source for the dispute so far.

It may be the truth, but a subjective truth, a truth of the Sussexes, in which Meghan, although she has only known the royal family and especially the royal family for a few years, should have a particularly large share.

It was only she who opened Harry's eyes to the "wrong" life he led.

Before Meghan, the second born seemed quite comfortable behind the palace walls.

And also as a "spare", i.e. as a substitute, should something happen to the firstborn or - as in the case of Elisabeth - the firstborn.

The term is not new, nor was it invented for Harry as a means of humiliation.

The phrase "the spare to the heir" also applied to Elizabeth's father, George VI, who actually had to stand in for his brother after his abdication.

Nevertheless, this role as a substitute seems to gnaw at Harry.

"Spare" is the title of his long-awaited autobiography, which is due to appear on Tuesday.

The 416-page book, which Pulitzer Prize winner JR Moehringer co-wrote as a ghostwriter, is unlikely to contain any new allegations.

If you believe the “Guardian”, who wants to have secured a copy in advance, then most of it has been said, and apart from the allegation that William physically attacked Harry in 2019, all in all it would hardly be the case worth.

If this family wasn't about the Mountbatten-Windsors.