In some earlier coverage of the unfolding Sentebale mess, I expressed my sense of deja vu. Just last year, there was a curious and coordinated campaign against Prince Harry, specifically regarding his board position on African Parks. Harry was president of AP for six years, then he was promoted to board member a few years ago. African Parks is a huge NGO which has a lot of private funding and it operates on a wide swath of land across a dozen countries. There are many problems between AP’s operations and various localities, and those problems absolutely need to be investigated and dealt with. But it was incredibly curious to see the conversation last year to solely focus on Harry and “why Harry should resign from African Parks” and how William and Harry always fought about Africa. So, obviously, now that 2024 campaign is being tied to the Sentebale mess with Sophia Chandauka’s bizarre claims about how she, the chairwoman who alienated sponsors and blew through $600K on outside consultants, was the victim of racism. Please allow Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast to come to his long-winded point:
Now, in the light of the spectacular falling out with Sentebale—which Harry co-founded in 2006 to honor his late mother, Princess Diana—the issue of abuse and governance at African Parks may be something the prince wishes to reconsider. The controversy surrounding African Parks is part of a broader pattern of human rights concerns associated with conservation in Africa. Critics say that indigenous communities are too often evicted, marginalized, or abused in the name of environmental protection.
In its November statement, Survival International said African Parks was refusing to address what it sees as the root cause of the abuse: “a racist and colonial fortress conservation model.” Such criticism is likely to be particularly painful for Harry, who has made much of how he believes his wife, Meghan Markle, was the subject of prejudice due to her non-white heritage when they were working royals. And the allegations of racism made by Sentebale chairwoman Sophie Chandauka—a Zimbabwe-born lawyer, may trouble Harry and his advisers most, should they now choose to reflect on his global charitable involvement.
Critics argue that Harry’s continued association with the organization undermines his humanitarian commitments—especially in light of his previous accusations of prejudice within the royal family during the Oprah Winfrey interview and his memoir. Sympathetic supporters of Harry will argue that the challenges he faces by being involved with Sentebale and African Parks highlight the complexities and risks associated with philanthropic work—particularly for high-profile individuals.
But there is also an argument to be made that the controversy surrounding Harry’s charitable affiliations suggests that operating without the institutional support of the royal household—such as experienced private secretaries and press officers to vet and tightly control messaging—may have contributed to these difficulties.
Demonstrating a commitment to ethical practices and human rights has undoubtedly cemented his credibility as a global humanitarian. But difficult decisions about his roles within certain organizations, and the need to advocate for systemic changes within the philanthropic sector, is something that the fiasco at Sentebale should bring into tight focus. The controversies serve as a stark reminder of the delicate balance required in charitable work—especially when it intersects with complex issues of power and race. For public figures like Prince Harry, this requires not just an unwavering commitment to the principles they seek to promote, but an attenuation to, and a readiness to act upon, the political signals transmitted across this undulating terrain.
I had several “oh, there it is” moments reading this piece. The way Sykes ties the Sentebale issue (a chairwoman misappropriating funds and screaming wild accusations to the British tabloids) to African Parks (a large, unwieldy organization which tries to work hand-in-hand with dozens of local and national governments) to create a narrative built on snide insinuation. The narrative of: look who’s being accused of racism now, Harry, hahaha, the only way out of this is by exiting your charitable interests and acknowledging that Africa belongs to William! And again with the “operating without the institutional support of the royal household” argument. It’s WILD. The same sleek palace messaging machine that was responsible for the utter clownshow around a missing princess for months last year? The kind of “experienced” courtiers who have been running this unhinged operation on the Sussexes for five f–king years?
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.
