King Charles III had two hypostases in the public eye: a philanthropist and a womanizer. What factors played an important role in shaping the image of the new British monarch.
He was the Prince of Wales for 63 years. And now – at 73 – Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor, the eldest son of Queen Elizabeth II, who died on September 8, ascended the throne under the name of King Charles III.
“This move was well planned – just like Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral,” wrote University College London political scientist Robert Hazell.
Charles’s life in the Royal Family
Charles III had enough time to get used to the increased attention on his person. In 1970 he received a bachelor’s degree in history from Trinity College, Cambridge. He then began a military career and, among other things, commanded the minesweeper HMS Bronington.
His marriage to 20-year-old Diana Spencer in the summer of 1981 caused a huge media outcry. Princess Diana was very popular, but the attention of the tabloid press was constantly focused on her. In 1996, Prince Charles divorced his wife. A year later, Diana died under dramatic circumstances in a car accident.
They say that during the separation, Charles said to Diana: “Do you really think I am the first Prince of Wales without a mistress?” At that time, he had long-term girlfriend Camilla Parker-Bowles – in 2005, he finally managed to marry her.
In the eyes of the British public, Charles III had two sides: a womanizer and a philanthropist. In 1976, he founded the Prince’s Trust, a charitable foundation to help disadvantaged teenagers and young adults. In addition, he supports art initiatives.
However, the new king’s biggest passion is protecting the environment and fighting climate change. Since 2007, he has been involved in the rainforest conservation project and has engaged a range of politicians, celebrities and businessmen in a campaign to promote important action against rainforest deforestation.
As king, Elizabeth II’s son is likely to continue to campaign for religious diversity and a multicultural, modern Britain. After all, he announced in advance that his coronation would be an event involving many religious movements.
How Charles tried to interfere in government politics
At the same time, King Charles III lacked his mother’s temperament, experts say. In political or social matters, he rarely remains impartial. In the past, he did not hide his views.
The inability of the heir to the British throne to remain neutral is particularly evident in the scandal surrounding the so-called “Black Spider” memoranda – letters from the Prince of Wales addressed to British Prime Minister Tony Blair and members of his cabinet.
According to the documents, released by The Guardian, Prince Charles tried to influence government officials and other politicians on issues ranging from saving endangered fish, ordering military equipment for troops in Iraq, or taking badgers to stop the spread of tuberculosis among animals. . The publication of these letters led to a long legal battle.
As king, Charles III had to control such passions, says political scientist Robert Hazell. “The monarch must remain unquestioningly neutral in all political matters, just as the queen did (Elizabeth II. – Ed.). Charles III will have the opportunity to speak his mind in a weekly audience with the Prime Minister. But he has to stay within his constitutional rights to advise, encourage and warn.” Otherwise, the government will remind him “what the duties of the head of state are in a constitutional monarchy,” the expert continued. .
Prince Charles scandals
In 2017, the name of Prince Charles appeared in connection with the publication of the so-called “Paradise Papers” – documents exposing details of dubious offshore investments of many super-rich people, including politicians, businessmen and celebrities.
In the case of Prince Charles, presumably, it was a company registered in Bermuda. According to investigative journalism, in 2007 the heir to the British throne pushed for changes in climate policy, but denied that he would benefit from these changes through his offshore business. Prince Charles himself said at the time that he was not directly associated with the offshore account.
Recently, new questions have arisen about the revelations in the royal “cash scandal”. Wealthy foreigners allegedly received benefits in exchange for donations to Charles Prince’s Foundation. In one case, a Saudi tycoon was knighted for his services, and in another, a Russian banker was allegedly promised a meeting with the heir to the British throne.
The revelations led to the resignation of three key employees of the charity, including a close associate of Prince Charles, Michael Fawcett. At the same time, the executive director of the fund then resigned “temporarily”. The Prince of Wales himself has denied any knowledge of the alleged fraud.
Charles III must avoid such incidents if he wishes, as king, to be highly regarded in the public eye – to these observers it is in unanimity. Or, as the political scientist Hazell put it: Charles III’s recognition and popularity with the people will depend on “whether he gets into trouble and what the unexpected happens.”
Source: korrespondent
I am David Wyatt, a professional writer and journalist for Buna Times. I specialize in the world section of news coverage, where I bring to light stories and issues that affect us globally. As a graduate of Journalism, I have always had the passion to spread knowledge through writing.