Once celebrated as a golden asset to any cause he touched, Prince Harry is now facing serious questions about his ongoing role within the Invictus Games Foundation—the very charity he founded in 2014 to support the recovery of wounded servicemen and women through sport.

Harry’s brainchild, established with backing from the Ministry of Defence and the Royal Foundation (then representing both the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex), has grown into a respected global initiative spanning 23 nations. But in the current climate, the prince’s association may no longer be the unqualified advantage it once was.

On the latest episode of Palace Confidential, Daily Mail Diary Editor Richard Eden argued that Harry’s personal brand has shifted so significantly that he may now pose more of a risk than a benefit to high-profile charitable efforts like Invictus.

“When Harry created Invictus, it was a brilliant move for him and for the charity,” Eden said. “He was the most popular royal at the time—it guaranteed positive publicity. But that’s no longer the case.”

Citing the example of Sentebale, another charity co-founded by Harry in 2006, Eden referenced remarks made by its chair, Sophie Chandauka, who reportedly acknowledged that some sponsors have become reluctant to associate with the charity due to the prince’s increasingly polarizing image. Chandauka allegedly described Harry—along with his wife Meghan Markle—as having become a “toxic brand.”

A Royal Patronage Under Pressure

While Eden emphasized that Invictus remains a “worthy cause,” he questioned whether Harry should continue to be its most visible figurehead.

“The organization is well established. Do we really still need him at the forefront?” Eden asked.

Rebecca English, the Daily Mail’s Royal Editor, offered a more measured view, recalling the overwhelming support Harry received during the early days of Invictus when he was still a working royal.

“People were practically going down on their knees thanking him,” she said. “But that was before he stepped back from royal duties. I haven’t covered the Games since then, so I can’t speak to the current mood, but Richard is right to raise the dilemma.”

Jo Elvin, the show’s host, described the situation as “extraordinary,” noting that a royal connection is typically considered a “mark of prestige” for any organization. But in rare instances, that connection can become a liability.

“We’ve seen it before with Prince Andrew,” English added. “Charities had to quite literally remove his name from buildings and letterheads. While Harry’s situation is clearly different, there’s now a real debate about whether his association helps or hinders.”

What’s Next for Harry and Invictus?

The debate over Harry’s future involvement is likely to intensify ahead of the next Invictus Games, scheduled for Birmingham in 2027. With senior royals expected to attend, Harry’s presence may present a diplomatic challenge.

“It puts everyone in an awkward position,” Eden said. “If Harry truly cares about Invictus—and I believe he does—then perhaps the right thing to do is step back from his role as Patron, for the good of the cause.”

It’s a difficult crossroads for the Duke of Sussex. Invictus is arguably his most enduring achievement, a powerful legacy that has positively impacted thousands of lives. But in the ever-evolving landscape of royal reputation and public perception, even the most noble of endeavors can become entangled in controversy.

The question now is whether Prince Harry the founder can separate himself from Prince Harry the public figure—and whether doing so might ultimately save the project he built.