Prince Harry, UK’s criminal record in Afghanistan

The book by British royal family member Prince Harry, which is expected to hit the shelves in the upcoming days, states that he killed 25 people (Muslim Afghans) during Afghanistan’s invasion, and felt no remorse about it. It is quite clear these words will draw attention and lead to a major discussion. The way our press handled the news should be analyzed as well, but I want to focus today more on what this statement means. 

It is obvious that a British royal family member confessing to killing 25 people at the time Afghanistan was invaded will lead the critical results. At least, after this confession, the U.K.’s role in the Islamic world especially after the 1990s will be examined again. As known, the major military operations carried out in this period caused incredible destruction. The U.K. supported during this period all U.S.-led invasion operations and, in fact, produced regular lies when Iraq was invaded again in 2003. These lies, produced during Tony Blair’s term in office, were used as a cover-up for the modern Crusades’ expansionist operations. Alliance members took a similar approach in Afghanistan. When the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, almost all Western countries and all their troops had no trouble taking a common approach against Muslims. As known, previously German and Australian troops’ murders in Afghanistan were on the agenda, but the witness of people with high representation capability like Prince Harry was never mentioned. So, what do Prince Harry’s words mean? 

 According to Turkish daily Cumhuriyet’s report, Colonel Richard Kemp, who commanded the British troops in Afghanistan, accused Prince Harry of betraying his friends. According to Kemp, Prince Harry endangered the lives of the people with whom he was on duty because it could have been a revenge attack. Kemp further claims that the prince increased threats towards the British army’s safety, and put his own personal safety under danger as well. The same newspaper reports that Prince Harry did not consider Taliban members, and thus the people he killed as humans. 

The Cumhuriyet article shows what Prince Harry’s confessions signify in terms of the U.K. Kemp’s statements about Prince Harry highlight the betrayal of his friends, the threat against the British army’s safety, and Prince Harry’s personal safety. Surely these are important determinations. When the first two are eliminated, Prince Harry’s personal safety is more concrete. Based on this concrete state, the question of the likelihood of a concrete attack on a former soldier, Prince Harry, or a covert threat remains unanswered. The implicit threat result should not be taken lightly, because this confession reveals the U.K.’s dirty operations in the Islamic region. It is also significant that an important portion of these was done in U.S. lead. As known, Afghanistan was invaded after the Twin Towers event. 

 Prince Harry’s confession should not be considered in bravado the category. In fact, these words are not simply the expression of the throne fights within the royal family. Prince Harry’s murders in Afghanistan are much beyond a personal problem. This thus indicates that we must not suffice with revealing what his confessions signify in terms of the U.K. As a matter of fact, it is possible to take these statements out of the context of revealing who is responsible for an event that took place two decades ago and place it at the center of a global conflict. 

 The following words in the U.K. commander’s critical statement about Prince Harry are also important: “Prince Harry, who fought in Afghanistan, gained a very strong reputation in both the army and the country. These confessions will harm this reputation, and he will not be seen the same by people who previously highly respected him, including myself.” It is clear that accepting these words as the statement of a British soldier will not provide us with an adequate perspective. Hence, Prince Harry’s confessions need to be considered within much different contexts. For example, those military members who knew of Prince Harry and in general the British army’s dirty operations in Afghanistan mentioning reputation – despite this fact – points to a different state of mind. This must be an important matter for the pro-U.K. team among us.