The weekly Jewish Chronicle newspaper wrote an editorial criticizing Sharon for handing the Synagogues over to the Palestinians, in the knowledge that they would behave as they eventually did. It continued by saying that the ministers in his cabinet chose not to go ahead with the destruction due to a popular feeling against this action. They said that Sharon should have taken a “more considered, responsible decision”. I was incensed and have written this letter, although I doubt it will be published:
I was most disheartened to read your editorial regarding Sharon's decision to leave the Gaza Synagogues intact.
You write that 'the ministers from his party preferred to ride the tiger of populism, rather than take a more considered, responsible position' regarding the destruction of the buildings.
I would rather infer that Mr Sharon realised (or was made to realise) that if Jews started destroying their own places of worship, regardless of whether or not they contained religious artefacts, some hostile groups may use this as justification to carry out similar attacks around the world.
The fact that the 'rampaging mobs' acted in the way they did, does not mean Mr Sharon should be criticised for choosing to take a moral stance vis a vis the Synagogues. Had the Palestinian Authority chosen to act responsibly, they might have instead suggested converting the extremely well constructed buildings into Mosques, Madras's, libraries or clinics and in this way, the rebirth of Gaza as a Palestinian territory would have signalled a willingness to consecrate buildings instead of desecrating them.”