Prince Harry’s future role in the Army was under question last night after he was barred from joining his men in Iraq.

General Sir Richard Dannatt, the head of the Army, who had initially concluded that the Prince should serve with his men for a six-month tour of duty, changed his mind after a visit to Basra last week.

He announced yesterday that Prince Harry would not go to Iraq as a troop commander with his Household Cavalry squadron because of specific threats to his life, “some reported and some not reported”.

Sources in the Household Cavalry expressed astonishment over the last-minute reversal. Prince Harry’s men of A Squadron The Blues and Royals have already left for Iraq and were expecting him to join them.

Expert View

Had he been killed, the repercussions would have been devastating not just for the Prince but for the British Army and for the British people

Michael Evans

• More

• Post a comment

Related Links

• Harry’s war

• In full: Army statement on Prince Harry and Iraq

Clarence House admitted that the 22-year-old Prince was “very disappointed” by the decision but accepted the judgment made by General Dannatt.

“He fully understands and accepts General Dannatt’s difficult decision and remains committed to his army career”, Clarence House said in a statement. Royal sources said that there was no question of him resigning his commission and leaving the Army.

The Queen and the Prince of Wales were informed of General Dannatt’s change of heart but had no part in the decision, the sources said. Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, also played no role in the final decision. Whitehall sources insisted that there was no political involvement.

A spokesman for Downing Street said it was an “operational decision”. The Ministry of Defence said that Prince Harry would continue to have a “full and active role in the Army”.

However, it now seems unlikely that he will ever be considered either for Iraq or for Afghanistan, because of General Dannatt’s revised judgment that his presence posed an unacceptable risk to him and to the men serving under him.

In his statement, General Dannatt said: “I have asked Prince Harry’s commanding officer to continue to develop [his] professional career in the Army, but I am not prepared to speculate, either now or in the future, on what Prince Harry might be doing over the next few weeks or months.”

General Dannatt declared on April 30 that he was satisfied he had made the right decision in February when he announced that Prince Harry would go to Iraq with his troop. He said that he was aware of the threats made by insurgents against the Prince, but similar threats had been made against all British troops.

However, he kept open the possibility of a last-minute change of mind when he said that he would continue to keep Prince Harry’s position under constant review. Last week he went to Basra and spoke at length to commanding officers on the ground about the risks of having a member of the Royal Family serving in southern Iraq.

General Dannatt, who is the Chief of the General Staff, acknowledged that Prince Harry would be “extremely disappointed”. He added: “His soldiers will miss his leadership.”

He blamed the intense media interest in Prince Harry’s deployment to Iraq as a contributory factor to the extra threat he faced. “It is a fact that this close scrutiny has exacerbated the situation and this is something that I wish to avoid in future,” he said.

Prince Harry would have been the first member of the Royal Family to be sent to war since the Duke of York served as a helicopter pilot during the 1982 Falklands conflict.

In an interview to mark his 21st birthday, Prince Harry said: “There’s no way I’m going to put myself through Sandhurst and then sit on my arse back home while my boys are out fighting for their country.”

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Times Christmas appeal: Letter from the Editor
• Conferences — what a waste of money
• Schools supremo learns a painful lesson