King Charles’s relentless move to banish his younger brother Andrew from public life was born out of a desire to isolate a weakened monarchy before handing over the crown, but it remains to be seen whether the major damage can be contained. Charles stripped Andrew of his princely title, kicked him out of his mansion near Windsor Castle and said he and the Queen were thinking of survivors of abuse, to draw a line under a scandal surrounding his links to Jeffrey Epstein that has dogged the royals for years. It was one of the most dramatic moves against a member of the royal family in modern British history, by a king who continues to undergo regular cancer treatment and whose priority is to shore up support for the monarchy before his eldest son, Prince William, inherits the throne. But some commentators said the move should have come much earlier. With Queen Camilla and the king’s sister-in-law Sophie both long-term campaigners against sexual violence, royal author Robert Hardman said Andrew’s links to the American sex offender increasingly put the royal family on “Team Epstein”, which Charles could not live with. “He wants to put as much distance between his brother and the monarchy as he can,” Hardman, the author of Charles III: The Inside Story, told Reuters. ROYALS GIVE ANDREW OUT OF SELF-RESERVATION The royals have tried for years to sideline Andrew, the younger brother of Charles and second son of the late Queen Elizabeth, fearing that he would tarnish the family with the same air of entitlement and bad behavior that has long surrounded him. Andrew was once seen as an exuberant naval officer who returned from the Falklands War with Argentina in 1982 to greet his mother with a red rose clenched between his teeth. But in the decades that followed, the Queen’s supposed favorite son became the focus of much ridicule as the British press focused on his personal life, dubbing him “Randy Andy” and “Air Miles Andy” for his jet-set lifestyle. That derision turned to revulsion when it emerged that Andrew remained in contact with Epstein after he was jailed for sex offenses in 2008, and when he gave a disastrous interview in which he failed to show any sympathy for abuse victims. Andrew told the BBC’s Newsnight interview that he did not regret his friendship with the American financier because it had some “seriously beneficial outcomes”. He left all royal duties in the wake of the interview and was stripped of his military ties and royal patronage in 2022. That year he also settled a lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre who accused him of sexually abusing her when she was a teenager after being introduced by Epstein. Andrew denied ever meeting Giuffre, who died by suicide in April. Her account rose to prominence again with the publication of her memoir this month. Banishment reflects the threat posed to the royal family. Royal experts said Charles’ actions reflected the threat to the institution, after a move earlier this month to stop Andrew using his title of Duke of York was deemed insufficient. In recent weeks, Andrew has overshadowed two attempts by Charles to shape cultural and public life – his historic prayer with the pope in the Vatican and the unveiling of a memorial to LGBT military veterans that was previously banned. “I think the fact that the royal family has decided to actually go against him is quite a big thing,” recruitment worker Anna Hunter, 29, said in London on Friday morning. Giuffre’s brother Sky Roberts told BBC Newsnight he praised the king but said a further investigation was needed. The Rape Crisis charity has praised the King and Queen for their commitment to survivors of sexual violence. But others questioned whether the royals took too long to act. “I don’t know that this step is enough to repair the damage that has been done,” Afua Hagan, a journalist and royal commentator, told Reuters. SUPPORT FOR THE MONARCHY IS TAKING Support for the institution has declined over the past decade, with the British Social Attitudes survey showing that 51% of people in Britain thought it was “very important” or “somewhat important” for Britain to have a monarchy. This is the lowest figure ever reported, and reflects a lack of interest from younger generations. To their supporters, Britain’s royal family provides stability and continuity at a time of constant political upheaval, serving as a draw for political leaders such as US President Donald Trump. But to their opponents, a hereditary monarchy that requires subjects to bow and curtsey is an anachronism holding the country back, while the lives of leading members, such as William and Kate and their three young children, are followed like a soap opera. Charles will hope that his very public defense of his brother, which a royal source said was supported by Prince William, will address the problem. “It is ruthlessness on behalf of King Charles, but it is also ruthlessness on behalf of Prince William,” said commentator Hagan.