Prince William's 'Heir' Status Prevented Queen From Sending Him to War

Queen Elizabeth II felt strongly that Prince William and Prince Harry should serve their country in active combat but decided the risk for William as "heir" to the throne was too great for him to be sent to Afghanistan, according to a former head of the British Army.

The queen's views about her grandsons, both of whom served in the army after leaving school, have been revealed as part of a new documentary due to air in Britain next week.

Titled The Real Crown: Inside the House of Windsor broadcast by ITVX, the show presents in-depth looks at key moments in the lives of Queen Elizabeth and her family which may be more familiar to viewers of Netflix's royal drama, The Crown.

One new interview featured in the show is with General Sir Mike Jackson, who from 2003 to 2006 served as Chief of the General Staff, the highest post in the British Army. In his position, he was closely connected with the queen who in her capacity as monarch was the longest-serving figurehead of Britain's armed forces.

Jackson and the monarch would have regular audiences (meetings) to discuss matters concerning the army, which in the years he was Chief of the General Staff was involved in the conflicts of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Speaking in the documentary, per the Daily Mail, Jackson explained: "What goes on in those audiences and who says what to whom remains for the two people involved, and I will break the rule about not divulging what goes on on this one occasion."

In 2006 both Prince William and Prince Harry graduated from the prestigious Royal Military Academy Sandhurst in England, after which both entered the Household Cavalry (Blues and Royals) regiment. As serving officers, both brothers could have expected to have been deployed overseas, in particular seeing active combat in Afghanistan where British troops were fighting the Taliban.

The prospect of the brothers seeing active duty raised security concerns owing to their high profiles as members of the royal family and along with this was widespread speculation in the press.

For the queen though, according to Jackson, the princes' royal status was not something that should prevent them from serving their country.

"She was very clear. She said, 'My grandsons have taken my shilling, therefore they must do their duty.' And that was that," Jackson said. He then went on to add that even with this consideration being made, William's position in direct line of succession to the throne and without any children of his own presented a roadblock to his being deployed.

"But it was decided that William as heir to the heir, the risk is too great," he said. "But for his younger brother, the risk was acceptable."

In 2007, Prince Harry was approved for a deployment to Afghanistan where he served as a forward air controller, assisting in coordinating airstrikes on Taliban positions.

William remained stationed in the United Kingdom, undertaking attachments to the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy. The prince trained as a search and rescue pilot in 2009 and served with the RAF in that capacity for three years based in Anglesey, Wales. After leaving the army the prince became an air ambulance pilot until 2015, taking up royal duties full-time.

Harry would be re-deployed to Afghanistan in 2012 after re-training as an Apache pilot in the Army Air Corps. He left the army in 2015 to become a full-time working royal.

Of the new information about the queen's take on her grandsons' army roles, royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams told Newsweek: "This is exactly in line with what I would have imagined the Queen would have thought, though we should not have been told it.

"Obviously for the military the risk with having William, as heir to the throne, on operations, was too great. It would also, as with Harry, increase the risk of those serving with him if it were known. William badly wanted to serve in Afghanistan, but was not allowed to."

Harry's army career was a central focus of his recently released memoir Spare in which he described his anxiety to serve alongside his regiment overseas, but also the trauma that serving impacted him.

The royal wrote in Spare that he killed 25 Taliban fighters, something that earned him widespread criticism from both active servicemen and women who do not usually make such public admissions, and also from the Taliban itself.

Members of the royal family have long histories of serving in the armed forces. King George V, King George VI and King Charles all spent time serving in the royal navy.

In 1982, when the Falklands conflict between Argentina and Britain escalated to war, Queen Elizabeth refused suggestions that her son Prince Andrew—who was serving in the navy—be moved to a desk job, instead requesting that he remain with his ship HMS Invincible which was deployed to the conflict zone where he flew missions as a sea king helicopter pilot.

Newsweek reached out to Kensington Palace and Buckingham Palace via email for comment.

The Real Crown: Inside the House of Windsor is available to stream exclusively on ITVX in the U.K. from April 20.

James Crawford-Smith is Newsweek's royal reporter based in London. You can find him on Twitter at @jrcrawfordsmith and read his stories on Newsweek's The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@newsweek.com. We'd love to hear from you.