Prince Harry wants to fight with 'his boys' in Iraq

By Anna Tomforde Feb 20, 2007, 15:00 GMT

Prince Harry - © Photorazzi

London - Prince Harry, the enfant terrible of the British royal family, with a reputation for drinking, partying and drug taking, is expected to make headlines of a very different kind next week.

On Monday, British Defense Secretary Des Browne is due to announce in parliament whether, and in what role, the 22-year-old 'party prince' is to be deployed to Iraq.

'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,' Harry said in an interview marking his 21st birthday.

From the moment he left Sandhurst military academy last year to join the regiment of the Blues and Royals as a Second Lieutenant, Harry has been pressing to serve on the front line.

'As a young officer Harry will want to go to war as a point of pride. There would have been no point in his training if that was never going to happen,' a senior military commander was quoted as telling the Daily Mirror.

Harry, third in line to the throne, would be the first member of the royal family to join the battlefield since his uncle, Prince Andrew, served as a Royal Navy pilot in the 1980s Falklands War against Argentina.

Harry's father, Prince Charles, was a pilot in the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy, and his grandfather, Prince Philip, had a distinguished career as a naval officer in World War II.

But Harry's brother, 24-year-old Prince William, who is currently training as a troop leader in the Blues and Royals, cannot be deployed to war zones because he is second in line to the British crown.

Troop Commander Wales, as Harry is known among his army colleagues, had warned his superiors that he would resign his commission if he was denied active service in Afghanistan or Iraq on security grounds, reports said.

But while Harry's determination to serve and do his duty is being praised by some analysts, it has presented the royal family and military leaders with a formidable security dilemma.

Harry, said historian Andrew Roberts, would no doubt 'return from Iraq a different and better man for the experience.'

But, the grandson of the Queen of England would also inevitably be a 'prime target' for Iraqi insurgents.

If the prince, already referred to as a 'bullet magnet' in the popular press, should be wounded in Iraq, the impact on the country would be hard to gauge, given that the Iraq war was 'far from popular,' said Roberts.

Six British soldiers have been killed in southern Iraq since Christmas, four of them by roadside bombs. More than 1,200 British troops are currently engaged in 'counter-insurgency operations' in southern Iraq.

Senior army officers will, therefore, be weighing up the options between keeping Harry out of harm's way with a relatively safe job at Basra headquarters, or allowing him to lead a 12-strong armoured reconnaissance patrol in outlying areas near the border with Iran.

The question of whether Harry, under constant royal protection at home, should be accompanied by a police bodyguard to 'oversee' his security, is also being reviewed.

Experts acknowledge that practical problems arise. Firstly, the bodyguards have not been trained to operate in a war zone, and secondly, there would be no room for them in the Scimitar armoured vehicles used by Harry's unit.

Their skills, said one expert, would offer 'little protection against roadside bombs.'

An alternative would be to assign a team of Royal Military Police bodyguards, who specialize in guarding senior commanders and VIPs.

British press reports have stressed that Harry's arrival in southern Iraq, probably in early April, would coincide with ongoing massive security clampdowns by coalition forces in Baghdad and in Basra.

'For Harry, Iraq will not just be the steepest learning curve of his life. It will also be a chance to earn some much-needed respect. For the first time in his life, he will be judged - not as a royal, but as a soldier like any other,' said Roberts.