Reckless Prince Harry has put his family at risk of a suicide bombing by announcing he killed 25 Taliban fighters in his “irresponsible” autobiography, a leading security expert has warned.
Harry has “played beautifully into the hands of the Taliban”, according to international security specialist Will Geddes .
In his forthcoming memoir Spare, Harry said he gunned down members of the Islamic fundamentalist group while on active service in Afghanistan as if they were "chess pieces" taken off the board.
The Prince's claims have already drawn attention from Taliban leaders, and Mr Geddes warned it could give credence to their ideological mission.
He said Harry's decision to reveal his "kill-count" was "stupid, unnecessary, immature and irresponsible" and described him as a "loose cannon" now operating outside the Royal Family.
And he said that by drawing Jihadi attention to himself, Harry has increased his threat risk from someone with a knife or firearm as well as someone with a bomb or a suicide vest.
M Geddes says Harry’s private security team will likely assess Harry, Meghan and their children's patterns of life and make them act far more randomly.
Mr Geddes emphasised previously the public presumed Harry was “not necessarily at the frontline fighting” and, beyond flying an Apache helicopter, what he did in Afghanistan was “kept under wraps for obvious reasons.”
Now Harry will be seen as a "more viable target" than he was before.
Mr Geddes pointed out that the Royal Family are already targets for “fixated persons” - obsessive types who often stalk high-profile figures - but this has been drastically escalated by provoking the Taliban.
Though the book is yet to be officially released the reason Harry published such information remains unclear.
Mr Geddes says that revealing your own "kill-count" beyond your immediate circle is breaking an unwritten code in the military, and he believes many veterans will have been “massively, massively unimpressed” reading what Harry said.
He said: "Prince Harry claiming to have killed 25 Taliban has raised his, his wife and children’s threat level significantly to jihadist threats.
"No one who has ever operated in conflict zones ever discloses that kind of information."
Anas Haqqani, the Taliban leader of Aghanistan, responded to the Prince's comments by saying: "Mr. Harry! The ones you killed were not chess pieces, they were humans; they had families who were waiting for their return. Among the killers of Afghans, not many have your decency to reveal their conscience and confess to their war crimes.
“The truth is what you’ve said; Our innocent people were chess pieces to your soldiers, military and political leaders. Still, you were defeated in that “game” of white & black "square".
“I don't expect that the ICC will summon you or the human rights activists will condemn you, because they are deaf and blind for you. But hopefully these atrocities will be remembered in the history of humanity."
Mr Geddes said: “Harry’s disclosure about the kills he made in Afghanistan is irresponsible because it heightens and certainly draws focus to him by Jihadists, by those who are supporting the Taliban, making himself an more viable target than he was before.
“A lot of people presumed or speculated that his participation on tours in Afghanistan weren’t necessarily at front end fighting.
“It was all a little bit kept under wraps, for obvious reasons, as to what he was doing there.
“Writing this is something that nobody who is operating in conflict would ever do outside the theatre of operations.
“You could potentially discuss things with your colleagues and the people you’re operating with, but you don’t come back and start trumpeting about it."
For a royal who fiercely protect his privacy, Mr Geddes says Harry's comments could bring him and his family unnecessary attention.
“This risk he’s now amplified is the threat not only to himself but to his wife and children, and for someone who is stating he wants to remain private and want to hide in the shadows this is really drawing more light on him than is necessarily," he said.
"It’s counterproductive, to put it mildly - it’s played beautifully into the hands of the Taliban.
“This is in print now, it’s gone around the world. The news broke this morning and the Taliban are already commenting on it, go on Twitter and thousands of people are already talking about it.
“They want something to hook on to to give them credence, to give them recognition, to give them purpose, to give them motivation, and he’s giving them all of that. As the old military saying goes, loose lips sink ships.”
And Mr Geddes says there is potential for a variety of retaliatory attacks.
He added: “Fixated persons are people very much obsessed with the Royal Family for various reasons, there are potentials for IEDs, potential for suicide attacks, potential for lone tech lone wolf attacks or lone actor attacks where someone might try and get him with a knife.
“There are so many different ways that threat could materialise.
“The security will be doing everything they possibly can to ensure the protection of him and his family against a wide spectrum of threats.
“They will have a certain amount of counter surveillance and hostile threat detection, which you will be implementing to see if there are any individuals that are carrying out hostile reconnaissance in advance of an attack, which often in the case.
“But it is publicly known that he lives in Montecito, a quiet Californian town, though from what I hear he is on the move down to LA."
The Duke's security team may now have to prepare for a host of with new challenges, if Harry has risked the ire of potential extremists.
Mr Geddes adds: “And it’s a nightmare for a security team, because you have to keep the guard up at all times anyway, but now you have got to look at individuals who may not necessarily just want to turn up and stab him, or physically attack him - this could be a potential suicider.
“That’s the greater level of risk he is presented with with a Jihadist."
He added: “Standardly, he would be looking at someone with either a firearm or a knife, not necessarily someone with an IED, whether that’s a planted IED or someone with a suicide vest.
“If I was leading his security team I would be reviewing what his pattern of life is.
“For example, if he and Meghan and the kids go for a cup of tea at a Starbucks down the road, I’d say we’re going to have to be a little more random in your behaviour and schedule.
“If he goes and rides his horse and plays polo every Sunday, it may be a case of saying we will have to beef up the team and carry out more checks to make sure that will be safe.
“Bearing in mind you're going to have household staff, nannies, people in the house - all sorts of things that you will have to extend the parameters of your security to.”
