Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were the subject of a new book by royal author Tom Bower, according to the first part of its serialisation published by The Times. A lengthy excerpt of Betrayal: Power, Deceit and the Fight for the Future of the Royal Family detailed claims about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s relationship with the Royal Family and how they navigated life since leaving the Firm and moving to California.In the excerpt, Bower wrote that Queen Camilla told a friend that Meghan had “brainwashed” Harry as his behaviour changed after the couple started to feel grievances about the Royal Family. Bower wrote: “Meghan had become a divisive agent. To please her, Harry was ignoring his old friends. He even changed his telephone number without telling his family.“The jovial lad about town became possessed by seeking revenge. “Increasingly, his character mirrored Meghan’s. Emotionally, he veered towards extremes. Simple dislikes became passionate hatred. ‘Meghan’s brainwashed Harry’, Camilla told a friend.”Bower also recalled a meeting after the couple returned from their honeymoon in 2018, when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex met Prince William and Princess Kate at Kensington Palace for what he described as peace talks that escalated, UK Mirror reported. Bower wrote: “William’s dislike of Meghan had been obvious after his warning to Harry before their engagement. ‘It’s gone too quickly,’ William had said about the speed of Harry’s relationship with ‘the American actress’. William’s suspicion of Meghan was echoed by his wife.”According to the biography, Meghan snapped at her brother-in-law during the conversation and said: “If you don’t mind, get your finger out of my face.”The excerpt said the book detailed how Harry was stunned by William’s reaction to their uncle Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s arrest, which it said fed Harry’s concerns about his and Meghan’s royal future. It said William stood by his father King Charles and his decisions around Andrew, including kicking him out of Royal Lodge and stripping his titles. It also said the Prince of Wales issued a statement after Andrew’s arrest, saying he and Princess Kate supported the actions of the King, who proclaimed that “the law must take its course”.Bower claimed Harry grew increasingly worried that William might take drastic action when he ascended the throne. The author wrote: “Rightly, Harry fears that the future King William could remove all the Sussexes’ titles and effectively banish him from Britain.“Whether Meghan understands the potential consequences of any deliberate aggravation of the Prince and Princess of Wales remains to be seen.”The excerpt also referred to an appearance by Harry and Meghan in Los Angeles in January last year, when the city was being ravaged with deadly wildfires. It said the couple met victims and helped out for an afternoon by listening to people’s stories and handing out essentials in a soup kitchen. Bower wrote the couple were mocked for the trip as some claimed they were capitalising on the disaster for their own gain. Bower wrote: “After recording a video of her listening and hugging victims, the scene was posted that day by publicists to Meghan’s 1.6 million Instagram followers.“Instead of getting credit for her efforts, Meghan was mocked as an attention-seeking pseudo-royal.” Bower then quoted Hollywood film-maker Justine Bateman, who said online at the time: “Meghan Markle and Harry are no better than ambulance chasers.“What a repulsive ‘photo op’ they achieved. They are ‘touring the damage’? Are they politicians now? They don’t live here; they are tourists. Disaster tourists.”Much of the excerpt focused on the Invictus Games and included claims that the Duchess of Sussex harnessed the event for her own personal gain, and that Harry and Meghan were difficult around event organisers. Bower wrote: “Meghan needed a global stage for genuine admiration and cheering fans. To her good fortune, Harry agreed that she could star at the Invictus Games, which he was about to open in Canada. Just before flying up to Vancouver in a private jet, she alerted her Instagram followers.“‘How should we address them?’” the Canadian organisers asked. ‘Meghan insists on ‘Ma’am’ and Harry should be called ‘Sir’,’ replied Nick Booth, the chief executive of the games.”The excerpt also highlighted purported internal worries, including those voiced by former Invictus Foundation chief Dominic Reid, that sport and competitors were being eclipsed and that the Games had morphed into “the Harry and Meghan show”. It pointed to poor event attendance and alleged crowd “padding” for the benefit of cameras, and suggested competitors and their families were being overshadowed by meticulously orchestrated photo ops.With the 2027 Invictus Games set to take place in Birmingham, the book claimed Harry plotted to have his father King Charles open the games, which it said would dominate media cycles and be a public declaration of reconciliation. However, Bower wrote the games were likely not immune from protests, making Charles’ potential appearance a huge gamble. The author wrote: “Considering all the damning words and lies spoken and written by the Sussexes against the royal family since 2021, and the enormous damage caused by the Sussexes’ exploitation of their royal titles, the chance of the King irritating the Prince and Princess of Wales to please the Sussexes is, in spring 2026, remote.“For the King to publicly meet his son and his troublemaking daughter-in-law, both guilty of betraying the royal family, is a gamble with little upside. The feud embroiling them is far from resolution, and it remains to be seen what damage the 2027 Invictus Games will inflict on an already fragile family.”Within hours of the first part of the serialisation being released, a spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex issued a statement condemning the allegations. The representative said: “Mr Bower’s commentary has long crossed the line from criticism into fixation. This is someone who has publicly stated, ‘the monarchy in fact depends on actually obliterating the Sussexes from our state of life,’ language that speaks for itself.“He has made a career out of constructing ever more elaborate theories about people he does not know and has never met. Those interested in facts will look elsewhere; those seeking deranged conspiracy and melodrama know exactly where to find him.”
