by Richard A » Sat Jan 14, 2023 5:55 pm
Lianachan is quite right - only the distraction isn't just from the more important things that are going on in the UK, but also globally. Harry's book relegated news of the Brazilian attempted coup - and yes, the rioters did explicitly call on the military to remove Lula - to way down the page, t least for a while.
But g-one's answer to Arneb's question is also right. Before Harry left the firm, he had two sets of military honours. The first was - and is - as Captain Wales. All sons and grandsons of the monarch serve in the military - the rationale is that the sovereign is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces and so should know what sending them to war actually means. OK, as with many things, the monarch now does this on the advice of the Prime Minister, but the theoretical principle still holds. This is why it was so controversial when Margaret Thatcher received the salute of the returning troops from the Falklands in 1982 - it was the Queen's place to do that, not hers. (Thatcher took the view that HM had nothing to do with it - it was her, Maggie, who had stood up to Galtieri.) So anyway, William and Harry went off for their 2 or 3 years’ military service – the only Brits left who were actually required to - and in fact both stayed on for a while afterwards. William never saw combat - he quickly switched from the army to the Royal Air Force, where he flew air-sea rescue helicopters in North Wales, but Harry did 2 tours in Afghanistan. So Harry got medals for that, just as his Uncle Andrew had got medals for his Navy service in the Falklands War.
But the second set comes from the fact that being a working royal carries with it various honorary military titles. Among Harry's was Captain-General of the Royal Marines, even though he never served in it; the King has a few specific ones as well as being Commander-in-Chief of the whole shebang, just as his mother did. Come to that, even Princess Catherine (still better known as Kate) has a few, among them Colonel of the Irish Guards. Those Harry was stripped of when he left the Firm – they were then redistributed among the remaining members.
For those with an eye for such things (helped by the TV commentary), this meant that when Harry was allowed to wear a military uniform for the late Queen’s lying in state, he wore the uniform of a captain in the Blues and Royals, the regiment in which he had served, with the medals he had earned. As a rare act of solidarity (possibly on the instructions of their dad), William similarly wore a Blues and Royals uniform, which he was briefly commissioned into, rather than the RAF one he normally does.
Could Harry have insisted on wearing his Blues and Royals uniform at the funeral itself – and the other occasions around then? Well, the King is Commander-in-Chief of the British armed forces, so to do so would have meant disobeying a direct order. Military discipline could have followed. I’m no expert on military law, but I guess this could possibly have included stripping him of his (retired) army rank and even if it hadn’t quite come to that, a court martial would have been as undesirable for Harry as it would for the King. So when it came to it, Harry didn't push it.