In an interview with the Yated Neeman in "honor" of Tisha B'Av, Rav Yosef Efrati said something that rubs me the wrong way.

Rav Efrati related to Har Habayit and said that from amidst the destruction it is perhaps a chessed, a kindness, that the Muslims retain control over Har Habayit. He explained that if Israel would have control over Har Habayit, we would very likely see all sorts of inappropriate events taking place there. With the Waqf in control they prevent anything inappropriate from happening up there. Rav Efrati referenced the events that recently took place in the vicinity of the Old City, such as the Zumba and Spinning marathons and other concerts to show that Israel would most likely plan some inappropriate event on Har Habayit....

I understand what he is saying. And he might even be right - the Muslims are dogmatic about protecting the Har from anything they consider, for whatever reason, to be a slight and offense to their beliefs.

I disagree with the second half - while Israel did have these events near the Old City, they were only near the Old City, outside the Old City. They have not done anything like that in the Old City, let alone near the Kotel or Har Habayit.

As a matter of fact, the way Israel has fought against Women of the Wall conducting their services at the kotel, I think it would be only fair to suggest that Israel would most likely not hold such events on or near Har Habayit and would protect Har Habayit from those wishing to do so. I think it is disingenuous to presume otherwise, though I understand that the Haredi community, and especially its leaders, have a deep distrust of the Zionist State and its authority figures, even if they are mostly ambivalent to its existence and not anti.

Something else about it rankled me as well.

It is one thing to believe that Jews should not go up to Har Habayit. Even though it seems to be a distortion of halacha, it is at least based in halacha. Some explain it as really just a precaution for the masses, as a blanket allowance would probably mean many many people go up without properly preparing and without being cautious regarding the right and wrong places to walk, so they give a mass prohibition with private allowances. I actually heard just yesterday from somebody that Rav Ovadia, who was publicly very opposed to Jews going to Har Habayit, told this person privately they could go up and his issur was preventative (I had never heard this before about Rav Ovadia).

So, it is one thing to say halachically Jews shouldn't go up. I might disagree, but I can accept that position.

It is another thing to say it is good, it is a kindness, that the Arabs are in control of it.

the arabs being there in the first place are, from a halachic perspective, something inappropriate happening there. There are "strangers" walking in the areas of the Holy of Holies, which is prohibited and a big problem (which would not be solved by Israel being in charge, but it is happening freely the way it is now), they play soccer up there, they have carnivals up there, they plant trees and do construction and destruction - all things that should bother Rav Efrati and every other halachic Jew, even without letting Jews go up. Instead Rav Efrati sees it is a good thing that the Arabs are up there and in charge doing whatever they want up there.

That bothers me.