Royalist: Prince Harry’s Sentebale ‘fiasco’ wouldn’t happen if he was still a working royal!

In some earlier coverage of the unfolding Sentebale mess, I expressed my sense of deja vu. Just last year, there was a curious and coordinated campaign against Prince Harry, specifically regarding his board position on African Parks. Harry was president of AP for six years, then he was promoted to board member a few years ago. African Parks is a huge NGO which has a lot of private funding and it operates on a wide swath of land across a dozen countries. There are many problems between AP’s operations and various localities, and those problems absolutely need to be investigated and dealt with. But it was incredibly curious to see the conversation last year to solely focus on Harry and “why Harry should resign from African Parks” and how William and Harry always fought about Africa. So, obviously, now that 2024 campaign is being tied to the Sentebale mess with Sophia Chandauka’s bizarre claims about how she, the chairwoman who alienated sponsors and blew through $600K on outside consultants, was the victim of racism. Please allow Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast to come to his long-winded point:

Now, in the light of the spectacular falling out with Sentebale—which Harry co-founded in 2006 to honor his late mother, Princess Diana—the issue of abuse and governance at African Parks may be something the prince wishes to reconsider. The controversy surrounding African Parks is part of a broader pattern of human rights concerns associated with conservation in Africa. Critics say that indigenous communities are too often evicted, marginalized, or abused in the name of environmental protection.

In its November statement, Survival International said African Parks was refusing to address what it sees as the root cause of the abuse: “a racist and colonial fortress conservation model.” Such criticism is likely to be particularly painful for Harry, who has made much of how he believes his wife, Meghan Markle, was the subject of prejudice due to her non-white heritage when they were working royals. And the allegations of racism made by Sentebale chairwoman Sophie Chandauka—a Zimbabwe-born lawyer, may trouble Harry and his advisers most, should they now choose to reflect on his global charitable involvement.

Critics argue that Harry’s continued association with the organization undermines his humanitarian commitments—especially in light of his previous accusations of prejudice within the royal family during the Oprah Winfrey interview and his memoir. Sympathetic supporters of Harry will argue that the challenges he faces by being involved with Sentebale and African Parks highlight the complexities and risks associated with philanthropic work—particularly for high-profile individuals.

But there is also an argument to be made that the controversy surrounding Harry’s charitable affiliations suggests that operating without the institutional support of the royal household—such as experienced private secretaries and press officers to vet and tightly control messaging—may have contributed to these difficulties.

Demonstrating a commitment to ethical practices and human rights has undoubtedly cemented his credibility as a global humanitarian. But difficult decisions about his roles within certain organizations, and the need to advocate for systemic changes within the philanthropic sector, is something that the fiasco at Sentebale should bring into tight focus. The controversies serve as a stark reminder of the delicate balance required in charitable work—especially when it intersects with complex issues of power and race. For public figures like Prince Harry, this requires not just an unwavering commitment to the principles they seek to promote, but an attenuation to, and a readiness to act upon, the political signals transmitted across this undulating terrain.

[From The Daily Beast]

I had several “oh, there it is” moments reading this piece. The way Sykes ties the Sentebale issue (a chairwoman misappropriating funds and screaming wild accusations to the British tabloids) to African Parks (a large, unwieldy organization which tries to work hand-in-hand with dozens of local and national governments) to create a narrative built on snide insinuation. The narrative of: look who’s being accused of racism now, Harry, hahaha, the only way out of this is by exiting your charitable interests and acknowledging that Africa belongs to William! And again with the “operating without the institutional support of the royal household” argument. It’s WILD. The same sleek palace messaging machine that was responsible for the utter clownshow around a missing princess for months last year? The kind of “experienced” courtiers who have been running this unhinged operation on the Sussexes for five f–king years?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

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

24 Responses to “Royalist: Prince Harry’s Sentebale ‘fiasco’ wouldn’t happen if he was still a working royal!”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Blogger says:

    IOW, they so badly want Harry back to work for them.

    Not going to happen. The Palaces’ institutional support is incompetence driven by petty revenge from the grey men.

    Huge pass.

  2. Hypocrisy says:

    This is ridiculous.. like the BRF is scandal free.

  3. I’m still of the mind that they are trying to ruin Harry’s and Seesio’s charity from with in. They have found someone willing to do their dirty work in the form of the chairwoman. It’s absolutely bizarre and diabolical what she is doing and then running to the gutter press bedmates of the royal family .

  4. jais says:

    Look who’s being accused of racism now, Harold, is definitely the message William wants to read in the papers. But Sophie has behaved so bizarrely and ineptly that I just don’t think it works. They’re trying to make it happen but it just doesn’t. And as far as the royal charities running better? nah. It’s more that anything that goes wrong is papered over by the BM.

    • Jukia says:

      Correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t the Princes Trust investigated by the Charity Commission and the Met Police not so long ago?

  5. Beth says:

    For tabloid-free info re: African Parks, see below (investigation ongoing, instigated by Harry). Click menu, newsroom, then statements for info re: Baka people. Also see African Parks Network under ‘our people’ for ALL board members (including the former PM of Ethiopia), Chairperson, etc.
    Africanparks.org

    • Beth says:

      Both Charles and William are involved with environmental charities operating in Africa facing the same criticism (Tusk and WWF).

  6. somebody says:

    So is the point that he needs experienced colonizers to show him how it’s done? And Chandauka’s claims sound like the parroted “bullying” claims against Meghan. It is just repeated allegations with no specifics behind it. Makes it seem like the RF or tabloids are behind it since that is their style.

  7. Amy Bee says:

    This piece is higely offensive. It’s not Tom Sykes place as a white British man to talk about racism. The Palace couldn’t even handle the Ngozi Fulani situation properly nor couldn’t they protect Meghan from racism. So how are we to believe that they could have handled this situation with Sentable Chair any better? Furthermore Sentable is an independent charity and had no involvement from the Palace so they wouldn’t have any authority to intervene in this issue.

    • MsIam says:

      More stellar “journalism” from professional gossiper Sykes. He should stick to eavesdropping at aristo parties.

      • Blogger says:

        Source is probably Tom Parker Bowles or Giles Coren, given TPB received massive institutional support with his cookbook that failed to sell.

    • Beth says:

      What’s more, both Charles and William are involved with environmental charities operating in Africa that have faced similar criticism for years (WWF and Tusk). Sykes is as ridiculous as he’s malevolent.

  8. windyriver says:

    Ah yes, the institutional support of the royal household. The one that oversaw installation of Michael Fawcett as head of a significant entity connected to Charles – the King’s (formerly Prince’s) Foundation. This article about the multiyear investigation of the situation by the Office of the Scottish Charity regulator illustrates what a fine idea that was. Note the article is from just this past January, that’s how long this has been unwinding.

    https://news.sky.com/story/inquiry-into-kings-foundation-finds-charles-former-right-hand-man-exposed-charity-to-substantial-risk-13285135

    • Blogger says:

      As I’ve read on here previously, any competent HR manager would pass on a job candidate who’ve cited previous work experience with the Palaces. Unless of course, they already have a toxic workplace in which case they’d accept lazy and gossipy Machiavellian candidates who could never get their work done such as Knauf.

      I excuse the equerries of course, who are lassoed into working for them, and have the discipline from their military experience.

      • AR says:

        So “no irregularities were found”, but the allegations were confirmed🤣

        Only the royals can so vulgarly distort the facts to protect their asses.

        I remember that Harry, or someone close to him, once mentioned that Charles wanted Harry to take over the foundation, but when he familiarized himself with the books/documents he was horrified by what he saw and refused.

        Harry was always a problem for them, because there is “nothing worse” than someone who cannot be bought.
        How was this highly moral man with a strong backbone, honesty and a big heart supposed to function in this pathological environment of human misery.

  9. Gemini says:

    I love it when they give the game away. If Harry were still an unmarried working royal, the royal commentators would have piled on the “uppity black woman”, accused her of disrespecting the memory of Harry’s mom, calling her “chair difficult”and a thief. Remember what they did to the woman from Sistah Space? But now all of a sudden they fight against misogynoir.?

  10. Lau says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised if they were soon suggesting instaling William at Hary’s place as royal patron of Sentebale. They will at least try.

  11. ariel says:

    I realize the media landscape has changed over the decades- but how is the power structure within the monarchy still SO BAD AT EVERYTHING.
    Except racism. They are aces at being snidely racist.

  12. tamsin says:

    This is appearing more and more like a malevolent attack on Harry through his charity. So the question is, who wants Sentebale to fail? The Sussexes are soaring- is this not a two-pronged attack against them? This is now an attack against Harry directly- not just through Meghan. I can’t believe in this diabolical game being played. I don’t think I’m being too alarmist or ridiculous. This Sophie woman must have backing from somewhere.

  13. bisynaptic says:

    It’s a great relief that the British royal family messaging/propaganda apparatus is so incompetent, because it is so relentless.

  14. Calliope says:

    I had to double check the date on this because I thought we already had this headline. So both the Mail and Daily Beast came to the same conclusion that this wouldn’t have happened if Harry was still in the royal fold? How curious and completely spontaneous, I’m sure. The conspiracy-minded part of me does wonder if their next step is to argue they need a patron who *is* inside the royal fold and it just so happens there’s a guy who’s just hanging out on sports messages boards so why not? It’s nonsensical but these people are insane.

    Unfortunately for them, spending $500K+ on “fundraising strategies” is a major red flag for most normal people. Then again, they never let facts or common sense get in the way of an attack. And trying to ruin anything and everything of Harry’s that they can.