By D'ARCY DORAN, Associated Press Writer
Commanders reportedly had reconsidered their decision to allow the prince to fight in Iraq for fear he would become a target of insurgents and his presence could endanger other soldiers. Harry's regiment, the Blues and Royals, is due to begin a six-month tour of duty in Iraq within weeks.
Over the past two weeks, newspapers have reported threats by Iraqi insurgents to kill or kidnap the prince, including claims his photograph had been widely circulated among militants. Military chiefs acknowledge that Harry would be an attractive target and that his presence could lead to a surge in attacks on British forces.
Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt said the decision would be kept under review, but he hoped his statement would end media speculation on Harry's deployment.
"The decision has been taken by myself that he will deploy in due course," Dannatt said. "I would urge that the somewhat frenzied media activity surrounding this particular story should cease in the interests of the overall security of all our people deployed in Iraq."
He spoke after newspaper reports cited unidentified senior military officials as saying an army review was likely to lead to Harry being banned from the battlefield, although he could still do a desk job.Clarence House, ' London office, would not comment on Dannatt's statement.
Harry, a 22-year-old second lieutenant, is a tank commander trained to lead a 12-man team in four armored reconnaissance vehicles. If deployed, he would become the first royal to serve in a war zone since his uncle, Prince Andrew, flew as a helicopter pilot in Britain's conflict with Argentina over the Fakland Islands in 1982.
The younger son of the late Princess Diana, Harry has been a frequent face on the front of Britain's tabloid newspapers, which have provided a constant stream of coverage of his party-going lifestyle at glitzy London nightclubs.
But he has said he is serious about an army career. After graduating from the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst last year, Harry insisted on an opportunity to serve in the armed forces.
Mr Philippson, of St Albans, Herts, told GMTV: "He (Prince Harry) went to Sandhurst, so it was inevitable he had to go out there because otherwise he would have resigned from the Army, understandably.
"What's gone wrong, in my view, is the tremendous publicity behind what's happened. What it's effectively done, all this publicity over the last few days, is every corner of the world knows what's happened, including all our enemies.
"How can he (Prince Harry) ever go out there again? He's only got to go missing in a nightclub in London and they'll all know where he's gone."
Asked if he agreed that Prince Harry's deployment had raised the profile of the war, and therefore the MoD's responsibilities, he said: "I do accept that since the tragedy with James - it was 18 months ago - the Army has been properly equipped. I entirely accept that. It would be criminal if they weren't so equipped.
"I'm afraid I'm very cynical about the objectives of the Ministry of Defence. I think they have just used Harry as propaganda to promote and glorify a war which, in the end, is going to be found to be a terrible mistake."Easy to say it's a mistake to have taken any action at all in Afghanistan, but if our operations in international security are a waste of time, then so are all such efforts. That is not the accepted case and not the opinion of any civilised society. However inadequate our efforts and however our mistakes in the distant ir recent past, the NATO supported efforts to bring some form of political stability and law that is better than Taliban or brutal feudalism is the only game in town.