UAE | General
Harry's credibility as a soldier comes under scrutiny over Afghan decision
Britons are divided on whether it is right for Prince Harry to be barred from fighting in Afghanistan because it is too dangerous.
- By Daniel Bardsley, Staff Reporter
- Published: 00:00 October 10, 2006
Dubai: Britons are divided on whether it is right for Prince Harry to be barred from fighting in Afghanistan because it is too dangerous.
Some UAE-based British nationals said they would not expect a member of the British Royal Family to be sent into a war zone, while others warned Harry's credibility as a soldier would suffer because of the decision.
Harry, the second son of Prince Charles and the late Diana, Princess of Wales, is third in line to the throne after his father and elder brother Prince William.
The 22-year-old was commissioned as an Army officer earlier this year after completing a 44-week course at the prestigious Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst.
Pete Aldwinkle, 44, a management consultant who spent 16 years in the British Army, leaving as a Major, said he was "not surprised" by the decision.
"Recently the news that's come from Afghanistan shows that it is a pretty dangerous place. You have to balance the risks against the benefits and weigh up whether he is likely to be a casualty. It's a fairly pragmatic decision they have taken," he said.
Exhibition director John Hassett, 42, said it would be silly to send Prince Harry into danger when he has spent his life protected by armed police bodyguards. "His uncle Prince Andrew went to the Falklands [during the 1982 war with Argentina] but he didn't go to the front line. That's quite normal for a member of the Royal Family," he said.
Shopping centre general manager Tim Jones, 45, said: "I wonder what the rest of his colleagues think about the decision. It cannot do much for morale or for Harry's credibility."
Jones said he wondered who had actually taken the decision for Harry not to serve in Afghanistan, speculating it could have come from the higher echelons of the Royal Family or even UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Georgina Banks, 31, a magazine journalist, said: "My instinct is that if you don't want to send a member of the Royal Family into that kind of environment, then don't send any soldiers into that environment."
Banks echoed Tim Jones's point that Harry would lose stature professionally as a result of the decision to keep him out of harm's way.
"It removes credibility from him as a soldier and from the whole idea of him being in the military. What was the point of his joining up and becoming an officer if he cannot serve with the other members of his regiment?" he asked.
However, Banks did say that if enemy fighters came to know who Harry was and the area where he was serving, he could be more vulnerable than the average soldier.
Share this article
Popular in UAE
-
Your pictures
Readers' pictures
A Selection of the best Gulf News reader pictures this week
