Why didn’t Queen Elizabeth take sides in Prince Harry & William’s feud?

I’m not surprised that People Magazine’s cover story this week is about Queen Elizabeth II. Her centenary birthday is coming up soon, which is why there’s a glut of “biographies” about her. Those biographies are, by and large, actually about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, obviously. Biographers swear up and down that the dead queen hated Harry and Meghan, never wanted to speak to them alone, was irritated that they named their daughter Lilibet, and that she personally authorized Angela Kelly’s eight-years-long smear campaign on the Sussexes over a fakakta tiara. What those biographers fail to mention is that in her life, she actually seemed to stay friendly, if not close, with the Sussexes. They also don’t mention that QEII knew that Charles and William would be terrible kings and that’s why she tried to hang on for as long as possible. Well, People Mag’s cover story is partially about why QEII didn’t fix Prince Harry and Prince William’s estrangement in her final years.

The royal family is missing their matriarch, Queen Elizabeth, who died on Sept. 8, 2022, ahead of what would be her 100th birthday in late April. In this week’s PEOPLE cover story, sources address the ongoing, six-year rift between Prince Harry and Prince William — and how the late Queen Elizabeth might have offered her support behind the scenes were she still alive.

“She saw both of them, even after the estrangement,” a source close to the palace tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue. “She also believed that you might have views, but you don’t have sides. She knew that families are complicated.”

Ailsa Anderson, a former press secretary to the Queen, adds, “It’s very difficult. The only two people who can mend this are themselves. She could have been the convener, but they have to take the first steps.”

While the brothers’ relationship remains strained, a source also tells PEOPLE that there have been gradual efforts to repair Prince Harry’s relationship with his father, King Charles, and the two have been talking more since their reunion in September 2025.

Prince Harry, 41, and Prince William, 43, have had a fraught relationship for several years. It’s been widely reported that the brothers’ rupture began in 2016 when William expressed concerns about how quickly Harry’s relationship with Meghan Markle was moving. In his memoir Spare, Harry revealed the complexities of his relationship with William, which, despite a public image of closeness, was marked by tension. Harry described William as both his “beloved brother and arch nemesis,” recounting instances of verbal and even physical altercations between them.

Tensions between the couple and the royal family continued to mount in subsequent years as Harry and Meghan, 44, moved to California in 2020, broke from the royal mandate of “never complain, never explain” and shared their grievances about royal life in various high-profile interviews, a Netflix series and Harry’s 2023 memoir.

In a new book by Russell Myers, William and Catherine: The Monarchy’s New Era: The Inside Story, the author claimed that William was left “absolutely seething” by what he saw as his brother’s betrayal.

“He felt betrayed by Harry to the extent that he vowed never to speak to him again,” Myers wrote. “Such was his anger that he told one of his most trusted aides that he had “absolutely no time to entertain either of them [Harry and Meghan].”

However, Myers said that it’s Kate, 44, who has been the steadying force for his husband amid the estrangement and the multitude of other stressors that come with being the future king of England. “Her attitude was consistently ‘this will pass,’ ” he wrote of the Princess of Wales. “Whenever William would get riled up about it, she would calm the situation down and bring him back to what matters most to them. That is their family and what they are doing.”

[From People]

Years ago, there were a few stories which I believed about QEII. One, she had one precondition for meeting Harry and Meghan before Easter 2022 – that Harry speak to his father. And I also believe that she said something along the lines of “you know what your father is like” to Harry. QEII saw Charles’s flaws and she saw that he was (and is) a dogsh-t father, and I think she was actively trying to encourage father and son to have some kind of reconciliation, or for Charles to mimic her approach to the Sussexes. Of course, as soon as she died, Charles’s first act as king was to bitch out Harry and tell him that Meghan was banned from Balmoral, which certainly set the petty, vile tone for his reign. But my point is that I believe QEII cared more about making sure Charles and Harry spoke and had some kind of relationship, as opposed to her caring about Harry and William’s feud.

As for Harry and William’s feud, I believe Harry’s story, in Spare, where he noted that William had some kind of shrieking rage-fit during the Sandringham Summit, and his childish tantrum was witnessed by QEII. Everyone in that family, even QEII, walked on eggshells around William for a reason – he’s violently stupid and ill-equipped to handle stressful or difficult situations. Meaning, I think there’s a reason why QEII never really bothered to encourage William and Harry to reconcile. She probably thought S-P-A-C-E was the best option.

Cover courtesy of People. Photos courtesy of Instar, Cover Images, Avalon Red and Backgrid.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

30 Responses to “Why didn’t Queen Elizabeth take sides in Prince Harry & William’s feud?”

  1. Tessa says:

    For one thing the queen could have called out scooter for trying to undermine harry and Meghan s relation ship. The queen approved the wedding and should have told her spoiled grandson scooter to back off. Scooter had keen wait ten years and cheated on her in the run up to the ring. He is no role model. Harry and Meghan dated for 2 years not 2 days.

  2. Tessa says:

    The bad decisions the queen made caused much fallout.

    • Hypocrisy says:

      She used the “falling out” hate campaign for the benefit of the monarchy to distract from any and all scandals and crimes especially the ones involving Epstein and her second son.. she knew what that son had been doing for years and paid a huge out of court settlement to AMW child victim so it didn’t ruin her jubbly which says everything about who she was imo.

  3. Tessa says:

    More st keen spin. She caused a,lot of trouble. Did people editors see the film clip where st keen took a threatening step towards Meghan. Plus I doubt scooter listens to keen advice. He shooed her away when she started to go near harry at Philips funeral.

  4. Smart&Messy says:

    “she said something along the lines of “you know what your father is like” to Harry. QEII saw Charles’s flaws and she saw that he was (and is) a dogsh-t father”

    I agree that she could have said that but not about the last part. I don’t think she thought of parenting as a duty to provide love and emotional support/stability. I don’t think she judged C for not providing that. If she encouraged Harry to talk to him is to make him understand that he should accept his father as he is and go along with it for the sake of the monarchy.

    I think people give her too much credit. She was a ditherer, just like KC. And she was not any better equiped to deal with the changing expectations towards her family.

    • Monika says:

      I agree. QEII was not the best mother herself, very distanced. She and Philip left raising the children to the nannies. Apperently she had more time for Andrew when he was born and we know how this turned out.
      Tbf QEII was raised in this system and probably did not see anything wrong with this.
      So imo QEII created some of the present problems.

      • Tessa says:

        Charles learned nothing from it. He did not become a good father himself. In some ways he is worse.

  5. Debbie says:

    I thought the queen HAD taken sides in the William/Harry feud. By standing by and doing nothing while William was busy involving himself in his brother’s romance, marriage, where the Sussexes lived, and their royal business, the queen effectively took William’s side.

    • Smart&Messy says:

      Exactly!! “Recollections may vary” didn’t she say that about H and Ms story?

    • Jais says:

      Well, technically she will support the future monarch no matter what. I’m endlessly fascinated by the lack of fluffy articles about the relationship bw the late queen and William. So yeah, like Kaiser, I do think she didn’t even bother trying to get William and Harry to have some sort of a relationship. Bc I think she too had next to no relationship with William as well.

      • Tessa says:

        The Queen renovated KP apartments for the Cambridges (then Keen and Scooter) and apparently was confident they would step up royal work. Instead, Scooter announced that he wanted to be an Ambulance co-pilot and postpone full time work. She let him do this even setting things up for him. She indulged his whims and perhaps he would show anger if she did not agree or moaned about the “weight” of royal work as he put it.

      • MFS says:

        This is exactly right: she did take a side. She sided with the monarchy. 🤷‍♀️

  6. YankeeDoodles says:

    The late Queen was legendary for not interfering in her family members’ private lives, which sometimes worked well and sometimes simply postponed the inevitable. But when she did act she did it with complete conviction and speedy dispatch. She watched Charles & Diana rip each other to pieces in the press for about 10 years with stoic resignation but immediately after the Bashir interview she instructed them to divorce legally. That was November ‘95 (Guy Fawkes Day, or, IIRC, Elizabeth & Philips’ wedding anniversary, I forget which) and the divorce was finalised — IIRC — in August 1996. She would have agreed with Mitterrand, who advised, “Il faut donner du temps au temps,” you have to give time some time. Time is like a developing solution, it allows character to emerge under the pressure of events.

    • Tessa says:

      Yet it’s odd that she did not order the divorce after Charles named Camilla (in 1994) as the other woman, and forced the Parker Bowles divorce. She made no comment.

    • Truthiness says:

      Yeah she was capable of action. When the whistleblower came forth in 2019 about Andrew’s corrupt practices with his money man Rowland, Andrew was removed from Buckingham Palace, no offices allowed for him anymore. Too little too late of course. Andrew pitched a MAJOR fit over it but there was no going back.

  7. North of Boston says:

    The Queen was alive and reigning when Harry was set up to be the brother trashed in the press in his teens and 20’s, a scapegoat while William got a pass for the same and worse.

    She was there the during the “straight out of Compton” press, when Sussexes had their successful Australian tour and immediately became targets of Charles William their palace staff, her palace staff and the press. And during all the wedding tiara, tights, flowers and tears nonsense.

    And she was still alive and reigning when Archie was born and depicted in the press as a chimpanzee.

    Don’t tell me QEII didn’t take sides. Staying silent or ‘neutral’ when someone is being viscously attacked is a choice, it IS taking sides WITH the abusers, slanderers, attackers.

    • YankeeDoodles says:

      This is to reply to @NorthofBoston, that is my hometown!!! The late Queen made sure to release a picture of herself and Philip with Meghan and Harry and Archie and Doria Ragland, in which she is visibly delighted and positively motherly with her great-grandchild, it is an image that reads of nothing but love and should have silenced all the haters.

    • Mayp says:

      💯💯💯💯💯, @northofboston

    • Kara says:

      Thank you! Because she made sure to lend her support and signal to the press to lay off the attacks when it came to Carrie Johnson (Boris Johnson’s wife) when she was pregnant. She never lent any type of protection to Meghan. We learned Harry wrote the papers multiple times and it was MPs from cross parties who called things out. That alone should have told the queen where public support was leaning.

  8. another cross to carry says:

    Ask the good people of Jamaica how nice qe11 was! Ask the Rastafarians of Jamaica about the abuse they endured in the name of qe11!

    THERE IS NOTHING NICE ABOUT QE11!

  9. Neeve says:

    I think Harry truly loved his Grandma and accepted her flaws but im sure he was hurt that she could have possibly done more. But its clear that Harry and Meghan have decided Never to tell how they really feel about the Queen,thats just one step too far.

    • Blujfly says:

      I think that, rightfully or wrongfully, they truly believe the Queen was not calling the shots at the Sandringham summit and that previous attempts she did make – like bringing back Sir Christopher Geidt to find a path forward for the Sussexes – were being deliberately destroyed by Harry’s father and brother and she could not or would not be able to withstand a united front on that.

  10. Beech says:

    Appros of nothing but I looked up “fakakta”. It’s been an enduring mystery as in how does one pronounce said word and what does it all mean?! I can now rest easy, it’s a Yiddish word and all this time I thought it was a made up word. Carry on.

    • Neeve says:

      I have always read it as simply FAKATA 🤣

    • 2131Jan says:

      My grandparents and parents spoke Yiddish. They used it to keep us kids from knowing what they were saying, but of course, you figure it out after enough time lol. I learned it as FER-CAHK-TAH (Ferkacktah). In Yiddish it means “shitty”, or “f*cked up”

      Funnily enough, growing up we *could* say it in Yiddish, but my parents would *not* let us say it in English lol.

  11. Chantal1 says:

    She did take sides – the monarchy’s side. Always. She did show some affection for the Sussexes through some of her actions towards them, but constantly allowed them to be perpetual scapegoats in order to protect Charles, Wills, & Andrew.

  12. GoodWitchGlenda says:

    Woman who grew up in emotionally stunted family continues to perpetuate emotionally stunted family patterns. Fork found in kitchen.

  13. bisynaptic says:

    She didn’t know how to run a family well. It’s a rare skill set.

  14. Theresa says:

    The side eye William is giving Meghan is very telling. He cant stand that she is biracial and that Harry got to marry the love of his life while he is sitting there married to bland catherine

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment