Prince Harry is once again making headlines, this time involving his 5-year-old son, Archie, who he claims is the world's youngest advocate against landmines.
According to Harry, young Archie recently expressed a desire to see footage of his late grandmother, Princess Diana, walking through a minefield in Angola. Because, of course, that's exactly the kind of thing that would captivate a 5-year-old. Speaking at the Invictus Games, Harry insisted that his son had developed a deep curiosity about landmines, which led to an emotional discussion about Diana’s humanitarian work.
Naturally, because what would a Prince Harry speech be without inserting a reference to his mother? During an interview at a wheelchair basketball game in Vancouver, he told Canadian broadcaster CTV that children don’t always ask the most predictable questions and tend to speak without a filter. Apparently, Archie’s unfiltered curiosity led to a conversation about landmines—because what preschooler isn’t fascinated by the remnants of war?
This is the same child who, at just 22 months old, allegedly used words like “hydrate” and reminded people to “drive safe.” Now, at age 5, he has supposedly developed a keen interest in explosive devices left over from war. Makes perfect sense, right? Harry went on to explain that he struggled with how to introduce the topic but eventually decided to tell Archie stories of individuals injured by landmines. Because nothing quite says "bedtime story" like tales of war amputees. Unsurprisingly, the discussion quickly turned to Diana. Harry claims Archie wanted to see videos and photos of his grandmother at work in Angola.
Since when do 5-year-olds request documentaries on humanitarian efforts? Most kids that age are obsessed with cartoons, toys, and snacks, but sure—Archie is apparently desperate to learn about 1990s landmine activism. For those unfamiliar, Diana’s visit to Angola in 1997 was indeed a significant moment. Wearing protective gear, she walked along a path that had already been cleared of landmines to raise awareness of their dangers. It was an iconic and powerful image, one that Harry made sure to replicate in 2019—because what better way to honor his mother than by literally stepping into her exact footprints for the cameras?
What’s truly baffling is how Harry framed this conversation as some sort of unexpected revelation. He even claimed, “Interestingly, it gave me a chance to talk about my mom, which I didn’t even really consider.” Oh, please. Since when has Harry ever missed an opportunity to talk about Diana? At this point, it’s practically his full-time job. So, let’s ask the obvious question—did this conversation even happen? Because no 5-year-old is sitting around pondering the dangers of landmines. The only explosions kids care about are the ones in video games and superhero movies.
This entire story has the same energy as Harry’s previous claims—like when he insisted his first word was “crocodile” or that baby Archie was handing out hydration advice before he could properly form sentences. His recollections shift so frequently that it’s hard to take any of them seriously. Also, where exactly would Archie have learned about landmines in the first place? Are these the bedtime stories in Montecito? “Goodnight Moon, and now let’s discuss the devastating impact of war explosives.”
One thing remains consistent—Harry never misses an opportunity to make everything about Diana, all while conveniently ignoring his living father, King Charles. Has he ever spoken at length about Charles’s numerous charitable efforts? Not a chance. But he’ll bring up his mother at every possible moment to stay relevant. And let’s not forget that the entire “minefield moment” was exaggerated from the start. Diana never actually walked through a live minefield, and neither did Harry when he attempted to reenact it. The path was already cleared and deemed safe before either of them set foot on it. Those dramatic photos? Purely for show.
At this point, Harry’s credibility is hanging by a thread. He’s told so many stories that he likely believes them himself. And if he does spend real quality time with his children—which is debatable—it’s clear he has no grasp of what constitutes an age-appropriate conversation. But at least this latest tale gave him yet another opportunity to leverage Diana’s legacy for sympathy and relevance.
