Tom Bower tells us at the start of Betrayal what a lot of us wanted to know: whether Harry and Meghan are going to divorce or separate. For, as he observes, “Divorce, debt and disaster are constant themes about the Sussexes’ future”. The answer is no… “for now”.
So the Gruesome Twosome (to misquote Julie Burchill) are still, it seems, an item. But two and three on that list are another matter.
The Sussexes, he tells us, need three million dollars annually to keep the wolf from the door, and on every front — Netflix, Spotify, jam retailing — the income is drying up. As for the suggestion that Harry apparently entertained, of a return to being a working royal, it too looks like a non-runner. Not with his baleful brother on the case.
In fact the most striking observation in this merciless account of the Sussexes is the obvious: that the fate of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor strikes a chill to Prince Harry’s heart. Not that his errors involve allegations in connection with Jeffrey Epstein; just that the willingness of Prince William to throw his uncle to the wolves tells us all we need to know of Harry’s chances with the family once his father dies.
Holding on tight: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex
Getty Images for the Invictus Games Foundation
There are not many major revelations in Betrayal, five years after Tom Bower’s original demolition job on Meghan in Revenge, which was brutal, thorough and riveting. This is equally brutal and thorough, but it merely confirms what the first book made clear, that Meghan begins where Thackeray’s Becky Sharp leaves off when it comes to vanity and ruthless ambition. But lest we forget, he reminds us that: “Landing Harry had transformed the life of a single, potentially unemployed 34-year-old actress who had just confessed to her publicist that she planned to freeze her eggs.”
This is not to say that Betrayal isn’t a fascinating read for those who like this sort of thing, which I do. I hadn’t, for instance, realised (directed by the publisher’s crib sheet) that Kamala Harris rejected Meghan’s offer of support during her election campaign, lest it backfire. Alas, there aren’t details other than a footnote, but royals, even ex-royals, intervening in a presidential campaign? Mad.
Then again, it had escaped me that Prince Harry, in a speech to the UN, had compared the Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Again, mad.
Bower is especially good on the controversial characters and institutions from whom the couple are willing to take private flights, hospitality and fees. To take one example, how about “Harry’s acceptance of a $1 million fee for addressing a conference in Florida organised by a controversial cryptocurrency firm”?
Harry compared the Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade with the Russian invasion of Ukraine at a speech to the UN in 2022
REUTERS
For context, we learn here that the lawyer in charge of his charity for HIV sufferers in Africa told Harry about “a brand audit among fifty organisations and donors [which showed] his personal brand value had crashed… Across the globe, Meghan actually damaged Harry’s remaining brand value.” It is sobering that the man fourth in line to the throne sees himself as a brand. (Incidentally, isn’t it time to revise the order of succession?)
But Bower is also good on the small stuff. It turns out that the late Queen didn’t care for Meghan and disapproved of her wedding dress on the basis it was too white for a divorcee. And no, the observation had nothing to do with race, Meghan’s perma-grievance.
What could Meghan do next?
It’s hard to see how the couple can survive this sort of exposure. Yet on they go.
And those looking forward to a final showdown should note that Meghan revealed in an interview with a New York magazine “that she kept a diary during her years in London, and she gave a warning about her own autobiography: ‘I have a lot to say until I don’t. Sometimes, as they say, the silent part is still part of the song.’”
So, this particular canary may have more in store for us. Can you wait?