Harry and Meghan ‘happy to be back’ in Britain as row over King’s letter reaches Invictus Games

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are settling into life back in Britain with their attention firmly on their children, according to people close to the couple, even as a dispute with Buckingham Palace has spilled into the Invictus Games.

The Sussexes are said to be “happy to be back” in the UK after moving from California with their children, Archie, seven, and Lilibet, five. Their immediate priority, sources say, has been helping the children settle into the new school year.

That family focus comes against the backdrop of an increasingly public disagreement over their status following a letter issued on behalf of King Charles III.

Uganda has withdrawn from the 2027 Invictus Games in Birmingham after General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the country’s chief of defence forces, said Uganda would not take part in an event without the King’s approval. The decision came shortly after the Palace reiterated that Harry and Meghan remain non-working royals and are to be treated as private citizens.

Sussex sources link Uganda’s withdrawal to the Palace letter

People close to Harry and Meghan have argued that Uganda’s decision was a direct consequence of the King’s letter.

Speaking to People, a source close to the couple said Ugandan officials had made it clear that their withdrawal was connected to what they viewed as guidance from the Lord Chamberlain.

The source also said the consequence was particularly unfortunate for the Ugandan competitors who had expected to take part in the Birmingham Games.

The comments came after General Kainerugaba publicly announced Uganda’s withdrawal. In a post on X, he said the decision had been made so Uganda would not be seen as opposing King Charles, whom he said the country deeply revered.

“We shall not participate in anything that does not have His Majesty’s approval,” the general said.

Asked by The Times about his decision, Kainerugaba said he had faced factions within Uganda’s Ministry of Defence who supported what he called “that Harry-Meghan nonsense” and said he had moved to quash it. He added: “I support the monarch. Period.”

Uganda had only recently joined the Invictus community, making its withdrawal particularly striking. The country was welcomed into the movement by Harry in London in July, around two months before the announcement that it would no longer participate.

Their children remain the priority

Despite the dispute, sources close to the Sussexes say the couple are concentrating on making the family’s transition back to Britain work.

Archie and Lilibet have begun a new school year in the UK after spending most of their lives in California. The couple are understood to have moved into a non-royal British home last month while retaining their residence in Montecito, California.

“They are happy to be back,” a source told People, adding that there had been a great deal to organise after moving the family halfway around the world.

The source said settling the children had “been, and remains, their focus” and that everything else would be dealt with at the appropriate time.

Harry and Meghan left Britain for North America in 2020 after stepping back from official royal duties, a move that became widely known as “Megxit”. Their return does not, however, represent a return to working royal life.

King Charles makes their status clear

The dispute intensified after Buckingham Palace released a letter on September 7 confirming that Harry and Meghan had not resumed official royal duties.

The correspondence, issued on the King’s behalf by the Lord Chamberlain, was sent to senior government and military officials as well as other authorities to clarify how the Sussexes should be treated following their return to Britain.

It confirmed that the couple remain non-working members of the Royal Family and cannot use their HRH styles. Their charitable work is conducted privately, while their position remains that of private citizens with commercial and charitable interests.

The letter effectively reaffirmed the arrangement established after the 2020 Sandringham Summit. Harry and Meghan had stepped away from royal duties and moved to the United States, while retaining their family connections to the monarchy.

The timing of the Palace statement caused fresh tension.

The Sussexes’ representatives said the couple were surprised by the release and had been given only a short period to respond. According to their side, the contents of the letter were shared with them at 1.59pm. They responded at 2.19pm in the hope that Harry would have an opportunity to clarify “one or two points”.

Harry was visiting Tower Bridge Studios in London and, according to the account given by his camp, could not be reached until 3.09pm. Two minutes later, they were told the letter had already been sent to the media.

Buckingham Palace declined to comment, taking the position that the letter itself provided the necessary clarification. Other reporting has likewise confirmed that Harry and Meghan received little notice before the document was made public.

Sussex camp prefers ‘public figures’ description

The wording that appears to have caused particular concern was the description of Harry and Meghan as private citizens.

Briefings from people close to the couple suggested that they would prefer to be described as “public figures”.

The argument put forward by their side was that, although Harry and Meghan no longer perform official royal duties, their international profile means they remain prominent public figures. Their representatives also objected to the suggestion that the formal guidance was necessary if they were simply private citizens.

The Palace position, however, was that the letter was consistent with the Sussexes’ own stated desire to live as private citizens in Britain and with the terms agreed after their departure from royal duties.

The dispute has also revived the question of whether a so-called “half-in, half-out” role could ever have worked alongside Harry and Meghan’s commercial interests.

Those close to the King have maintained that the latest clarification was intended to remove uncertainty for officials rather than create a new confrontation with the Sussexes.

The Daily Mail also reported that suggestions the letter had been timed specifically to influence an upcoming Ravec meeting over Harry’s security were incorrect. The explanation given was that the Palace wanted to establish clarity ahead of the Sussexes’ programme of activities in Britain.

PR expert warns Invictus dispute could overshadow the Games

The fallout has prompted concern among public relations specialists about the effect the dispute could have on the Invictus Games.

PR adviser Mark Borkowski said Uganda’s withdrawal should be treated as a warning for Harry and Meghan.

He argued that the continuing public exchanges between the Sussexes and the Palace risk shifting attention away from the purpose of Invictus, which Harry founded for wounded, injured and sick service personnel.

“Uganda is the warning,” Borkowski told the Daily Mail. “The Sussex soap opera is now damaging Invictus, the one unimpeachable thing Harry created. The brand is beginning to consume the cause.”

He also criticised what he described as repeated briefings against the King and suggested that the Sussexes were trying to combine the freedoms of private citizens with the influence associated with royalty.

Borkowski said: “They’ve confused briefing with strategy. They want the freedoms of private citizens with the power of royalty and brief furiously whenever anyone points out the contradiction.”

His comments came after General Kainerugaba’s announcement that Uganda would withdraw from the 2027 Games.

The development was especially notable because Uganda had only recently been welcomed into the Invictus community. In July, Uganda’s defence minister Kiryowa Kiwanuka was photographed alongside Harry at an Invictus Games gathering in London.

The country’s decision followed the Palace’s clarification of Harry and Meghan’s status by only a matter of days. Other reports have also linked the timing of the withdrawal to the King’s letter, although the Palace itself has not said that it opposed Uganda’s participation in Invictus.

British public divided over a return to royal duties

The latest row comes as a new YouGov poll suggests that most Britons do not want Harry and Meghan to return as working royals.

YouGov asked 4,506 adults whether the couple should become working members of the Royal Family again “at some point” now that they are back in Britain.

Just over half, 51 per cent, said they should not return to official duties.

Only 16 per cent said Harry and Meghan should become working royals again, while 33 per cent said they did not know.

The poll was conducted on Wednesday, a day after the Sussexes pushed back against Buckingham Palace’s statement confirming that they remained non-working royals.

The figures underline the gap between the couple’s return to Britain and any suggestion that they might return to official royal life.

Their move back to the UK was announced in August, with the family arriving on August 26 after six years in California. They are expected to remain based in Britain for an extended period while keeping their home in Montecito.

Harry prepares for a series of September engagements

While the argument over royal status continues, Harry is beginning a programme of public appearances in Britain.

His team has announced several “September public engagements”, including the inaugural Invictus Spirit Awards, the launch of the Invictus education programme INSPIRE and the annual WellChild Awards.

Full details, including the dates of the appearances, had yet to be published.

The first Invictus Spirit Awards will recognise individuals, organisations and communities described as embodying the resilience, service and unconquered spirit at the centre of the Invictus movement.

Harry is also due to take part in the launch of INSPIRE, an education programme built around the Invictus Games and the experiences of its competitors.

As part of the launch, he will play pickleball with school pupils and take part in an assembly.

The programme was designed by teachers for learners from early years through to Key Stage 5. It uses stories from the Invictus Games to produce curriculum-aligned resources covering subjects including maths, English, STEM, art, performing arts, sport and PSHE education.

These activities provide Harry with a significant public role in Britain even though the Palace has made clear that his work is being carried out privately rather than as part of the working Royal Family.

WellChild remains a longstanding commitment

Harry will also attend the WellChild Awards, an event that has been a regular part of his calendar for years.

He has been patron of WellChild, the national charity supporting seriously ill children and their families, since 2007.

His team described the forthcoming appearance as a continuation of his long association with the organisation. Harry has attended the awards 15 times, making the event a significant part of his annual programme.

At this year’s ceremony, he will meet the winners and their families, carers and health professionals. He is expected to hear about their experiences of caring for children with serious and complex health needs.

For now, the Sussexes’ return to Britain is therefore taking shape on two very different tracks.

At home, their priority is settling Archie and Lilibet into school and establishing a new family routine after years in California. Publicly, Harry is preparing to continue his charitable work and his involvement with Invictus.

At the same time, the King’s decision to formally reaffirm the couple’s non-working status has exposed unresolved tensions over how Harry and Meghan should be regarded now that they are living in Britain again.

Uganda’s withdrawal has brought those tensions into the Invictus arena, placing renewed attention on an organisation that has remained one of Harry’s most important projects since he created it in 2014.

The Sussexes may be back in Britain, but the Palace has made clear that their return home does not amount to a return to royal duties.