Prince Harry’s Taliban kill comments have ‘damaged reputation,’ says ex-commander

A woman leafs through the "En la sombra" (In the shadow) Spanish version of the book "Spare" an autbiography by Britain's Prince Harry after buying it in Madrid on January 5, 2023, despite the publication date set at January 10 with stringent measures in place. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 06 January 2023
Follow

Prince Harry’s Taliban kill comments have ‘damaged reputation,’ says ex-commander

  • Royal says he killed 25 fighters in Afghanistan; ‘I didn’t think of those 25 as people’
  • Retired Col. Richard Kemp: Comments ‘ill-judged’ and ‘misleading’

LONDON: Prince Harry’s remarks about killing 25 Taliban fighters while serving in the UK Armed Forces in Afghanistan have damaged his reputation, a former British commander has told the BBC.

Retired Col. Richard Kemp described Harry’s statement — that the fighters were “chess pieces removed from the board” — as “ill-judged” and “misleading.”

The prince’s remarks on his period as a helicopter pilot in Afghanistan came as part of his memoir “Spare” ahead of the book’s release.

He said: “It wasn’t a statistic that filled me with pride but nor did it leave me ashamed. When I found myself plunged in the heat and confusion of combat, I didn’t think of those 25 as people.

“They were chess pieces removed from the board. Bad people eliminated before they could kill good people.”

Kemp criticized Harry’s summary of the UK Armed Forces’ attitude toward enemy combatants, saying: “I think he’s wrong when he says in his book that insurgents were seen just as being virtually unhuman — subhuman perhaps — just as chess pieces to be knocked over. That’s not the case at all. And it’s not the way the British Army trains people as he claims.

“I think that sort of comment that doesn’t reflect reality, is misleading and potentially valuable to those people who wish the British forces and British government harm, so I think it was an error of judgment.

“It inflames old feelings of revenge that might have been forgotten about ... no doubt about it there are people in the world today who already would have seen this and will be thinking about getting him back.”

MP Adam Holloway, who served with the British Army during the Iraq War, said Harry’s comments broke a longtime military rule to avoid revealing personal kill counts. He added: “It’s not about macho codes. It’s about decency and respect for the lives you have taken.”

A serving soldier told the BBC that the prince’s comments were “very unsoldier-like.”

A UK Ministry of Defence spokesperson, when asked for comment by the BBC on Harry’s remarks, said: “We do not comment on operational details for security reasons.”


Row erupts in UK over support for British-Egyptian activist Alaa Abd El-Fattah

Updated 3 sec ago
Follow

Row erupts in UK over support for British-Egyptian activist Alaa Abd El-Fattah

  • Arab Spring campaigner’s ‘abhorrent’ social media posts resurface after he arrived in Britain following release from Egyptian prison
  • PM Starmer criticized for glowing welcome to activist who had previously been supported by both Tory and Labour governments
LONDON: The UK prime minister is facing criticism after he celebrated the return to Britain of a human rights activist who was recently released from an Egyptian prison but whose past social media posts apparently contained violent and antisemitic language.
Successive British governments have campaigned for the release of Alaa Abd El-Fattah, a dual national who had been imprisoned in Egypt for most of the past 14 years. He returned to the UK on Friday after Egyptian authorities lifted a travel ban that had forced him to remain in the country since he was freed in September.
But a senior member of the opposition Conservative Party on Saturday criticized Prime Minister Keir Starmer for giving a “personal, public endorsement” to Abd El-Fattah when Starmer said he was “delighted” the activist had been reunited with his family in Britain.
Robert Jenrick, the Conservative spokesman on justice issues, demanded to know whether Starmer knew about historical social media posts in which Abd El-Fattah allegedly endorsed killing “Zionists’’ and police. Jenrick also called on Starmer to condemn Abd El-Fattah’s statements and withdraw his “unalloyed endorsement” of the activist.
“Nobody should be imprisoned arbitrarily nor for peaceful dissent,’’ Jenrick wrote. “But neither should the prime minister place the authority of his office behind someone whose own words cross into the language of racism and bloodshed.”
The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office said in a statement that it had been “a long-standing priority” of governments under both major parties to work for Abd El-Fattah’s release. But that does not imply an endorsement of his social media posts, the spokesman said.
“The government condemns Mr. El-Fattah’s historic tweets and considers them to be abhorrent,” the statement said, using a slightly different style for his last name.
Abd El-Fattah’s family in the UK had vigorously campaigned for his release, arguing that he had spent most of the past 14 years behind bars because of his opposition to the government of President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi.
His mother, Laila Soueif, 69, staged a 10-month hunger strike to pressure British authorities to do more to secure her son’s release.
Starmer on Friday paid tribute to Abd El-Fattah’s family and all the others who campaigned for his freedom.
“I’m delighted that Alaa Abd El-Fattah is back in the UK and has been reunited with his loved ones, who must be feeling profound relief,” Starmer said.
But soon after Abd El-Fattah arrived at London’s Heathrow Airport, critics began circulating historical social media posts in which he appeared to endorse the killing of Zionists and police.
The Times of London reported that Abd El-Fattah has previously said the comments were taken out of context and were part of a “private conversation” that took place during an Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip.
Abd El-Fattah’s press team didn’t immediately response to a request for comment, and it was not immediately clear whether the posts were authentic.