Meghan is carefully rebranding as a stateswoman – but where’s the substance? What differentiates her from any other well-educated, well-meaning, left-leaning woman?

There have long been rumours that Meghan Markle harbours political ambitions.

From the very early days of her relationship with Prince Harry, royal watchers questioned whether a woman who had called Donald Trump “divisive” and “misogynistic”, before discouraging Americans from voting for him ahead of the 2016 US election, could ever be comfortable as a royal – infamously a position that forbids revealing even the slightest political leaning, let alone actual intervention.

For a time, she appeared to accept that royals and politics do not mix but when she and Prince Harry stepped back from their roles and set up home in California, rumours were rife that she was ready to flex her political muscles.

Yet while there have been murmurings and even speculation that a run for the Senate was in the offing, Meghan’s most direct political intervention was a 1,030-word letter she penned to senior Democrats in 2021 where she advocated for parental leave as a “national right”, drawing on her own experience as a mother of two small children, while reportedly cold-calling senators seeking their support on the issue.

Those political aspirations seemed to be put on hold while she embraced other enterprises – hosting podcasts, appearing in a Netflix documentary, and most recently, launching a fledgling lifestyle brand. But there are now whispers that a political rebrand of the Duchess of Sussex is afoot.

The couple’s recent visit to Nigeria, initially assumed by many (myself included) to be a kind of faux-royal tour, looks like it may have had a very different intent.

The three-day, highly publicised trip, which has been described as a “presidential” tour, was stage-managed by Miranda Barbot, a slick PR guru who helped get Barack Obama re-elected, and was on hand to ensure the visit went without a hitch.

Royal watchers have speculated that certain events – for example a panel discussion on Saturday when Meghan spoke in front of 50 of Nigeria’s top female leaders from the the worlds of politics, media and business – were designed to show the Duchess of Sussex, not as a “part-time royal” fitting in tours in between commercial commitments, but as a sure-footed stateswoman on the global stage.

There’s no doubting that the tour was successful – it was certainly far smoother and better managed than the Prince and Princess of Wales’ Jamaica tour where gaffes included the infamous photograph of the couple interacting with local children through a chain-link fence. Meghan definitely looked the part but – as I come back to again and again with the Duchess of Sussex’s projects – where is the actual substance? What do we know of her political vision? Or her political ability?

Success in the world of politics surely depends on the skill with which you can work the system. Meghan’s attempts to infiltrate that sphere have been by no means wholly successful. It was reported that she and Prince Harry requested a ride back to the US on board Air Force One alongside President Joe Biden and the First Lady after the Queen’s memorial service – a request which received an immediate no from the White House.

We do know that Meghan is a politically engaged woman. She wrote a letter to Procter & Gamble as a child to complain about a sexist advertising campaign for dish soap which apparently succeeded in getting said advertisement changed. We know that she cares about women’s empowerment and, pre-Harry, she was named a UN Women’s Advocate for Women’s Political Participation and Leadership. Do I know exactly what that title entails? No, but it sounds impressive.

And here – in my opinion – is the crux of the issue. Meghan certainly can look the part and she has the kind of name recognition and contacts that would be the envy of any would-be politician, but what differentiates her political beliefs and action from those of any other well-educated, well-meaning, left-leaning woman of her age and background?

Surely it takes more than looking stateswoman-like on a slick foreign visit to make it in the slippery world of Washington, DC?