If the monarchy aims to endure, there seems to be only one viable path: King Charles needs to step down.

This might sound drastic, perhaps even without precedent. However, the gravity of the current turmoil enveloping the Crown cannot be overstated.

The early morning arrest of Andrew by police, catching the disgraced former prince off guard at 8 am, is unlikely to mark the conclusion of this scandal.

In fact, it could merely signal the beginning.

The forthcoming revelations, steeped in potential criminal activity and scandal, threaten the very existence of the British Royal Family, with the risk of further incriminations.

This is exactly what William has reportedly been cautioning against, although his warnings largely fell on deaf ears. It took issuing an ultimatum to persuade his father to officially strip Andrew of his titles, a decision that was finally declared on October 30, 2025.

‘William absolutely loathes Andrew and has for years,’ a well-placed source says.

If the Prince of Wales had his way, ‘he would have Andrew banished,’ the source continued.

‘He told his father: “It’s either him or me.” So, Charles had to step up and ice Andrew out.’

To a point.

The King has still allowed his brother to live, rent-free, on the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk — which is where he was at the time of his arrest.

If the monarchy is to survive, there is only one solution: King Charles must go. That might sound excessive, unprecedented even. But the current crisis engulfing the Crown is grave indeed.

Andrew’s arrest – the police, unannounced, rousting the disgraced former prince from his bed at 8am – is surely not the end of this scandal. It may only be the beginning. 

And all in the wake of newly released emails from Andrew’s equally greedy, disgusting ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, calling the dead pedophile Jeffrey Epstein ‘the brother I have always wished for’.

Along with other pleas to ‘just marry me’. Or sharing the grubby detail that her daughter Eugenie was off on a ‘shagging weekend’.

Does Sarah seem ashamed in the wake of her ex-husband’s arrest? No. Not in the least.

She is, by all reports and in typical fashion, most worried about where she’ll find her next sugar daddy to bankroll her utterly pointless lifestyle.

‘Fergie has behaved like an absolute tramp throughout,’ my source says. ‘She’s taken thousands from Epstein. She’s up to her totters in it.’

As for Andrew, this royal insider says the photo of the former prince taken Thursday night, looking traumatized after he was released from police custody, was a very real reading of his emotional state.

‘Andrew is on watch,’ the source says. ‘He’s an international pariah, and this [arrest] is just the trade envoy stuff.’

And so the next question, the question that must be asked: What did the King know, and when did he know it?

Charles has always been conflict averse. And the very Shakespearean twist here is that his avoidance, his unwillingness to make the hard decision swiftly and confidently, is what will likely cost him his legacy.

As one former royal aide put it: ‘Charles is now a lame duck.’

Recall what the late Princess Diana said in her Panorama interview in 1995 — one she was manipulated into giving under false pretenses, but one in which she spoke the unspeakable.

Charles, she told the world, wasn’t up to ‘the top job’.

At the time, her criticism was taken as the bitterness of a scorned wife.

Thirty-one years on, Diana was right.

There is a very good chance that the longer Charles maintains ‘the top job’, the worse this will get.

If Andrew is charged and goes to trial, he will be prosecuted by the Crown. What if the former prince implicates Charles as part of his defense strategy? The King surely cannot be a witness in his own court.

And the idea that Charles knew nothing of the Epstein affair truly strains credulity.

Remember: Andrew was loaned $16 million by the Royal Family to help settle a lawsuit bought by the late Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre, who claimed she was sex trafficked to Andrew. He has always denied wrongdoing.

To put this crisis in American terms: If a major corporation — say Apple or Starbucks — was caught up in the Epstein files, to this length of time and degree of closeness, their CEO would be forced to resign, no matter how innocent he was.

The Firm, as it’s known, is also a big business. To survive, it is going to need a big resignation.

The Firm, as it’s known, is also a big business. To survive, it is going to need a big resignation.

Charles would doubtless feel that to give up the throne would be to betray his people. But we are in a different world now, one in which abdication could very well be seen as the righteous thing, a sacrifice made for the good of the British people, the future of the monarchy, and most importantly, the victims.

He must allow William — younger, modern, more muscular in age and decision-making — to ascend sooner than later.

Recall William and Kate at that Trump state dinner – resplendent, vibrant, beaming and dignified. They are the future.

Kate has come through her cancer diagnosis with strength and class. Both she and her husband, according to a recent YouGov poll, are the most popular members of the Royal Family: William at 77 percent, Catherine at 74.

The King might consider stepping aside before his popularity falls further. To right his legacy and change the narrative: All eyes would be on a cleansing, a changing of the guard, a Coronation of beauty, youth and the future.

And it could be done elegantly. The King could wait a few weeks or months before citing his continued ill health.

But Charles must give up his crown in order to save it.