Reviewer changed their mind after positive earlier feedback I find myself in a very unusual situation. After sending the paper to a top journal, we received two positive feedbacks after 12 months, asking only for minor revisions.
We promptly did the revision and 6 months later we received the reports: one reviewer recommended acceptance and the other rejection, saying simply that the paper was not suitable for such a top journal.
The editor sent out the rejection to us saying that he agrees the paper is not suitable for such a top journal.
I wonder if this is a reasonable behavior of a reviewer (and editor). Is it reasonable to simply &quot;change your mind&quot; about the paper (without a justification)? I feel disrespected as a researcher for receiving their honest opinion on my work only after a second round of review.
My question is: Should I reply to the editor or not? What should I say?

Edit: I replied to the editor pointing out two things: i) How should I have replied to the minor revisions to meet the journal standard? ii) Asking for a third reviewer given the unusual radical change of mind of the reviewer
Edit 2: It turns out the paper has been handled by an anonymous associate editor. The editor in chief replied agreeing that the reviewer and the associate editor made a poor job in the first review. However, at this point, there's nothing that can be done.
The last time this happened to me, it was because one of the two original reviewers was unable to review the revision, but journal policy mandated two accept recommendations before acceptance. So the editor invited a third reviewer, who recommended rejection. I do think it's pretty unfair to the authors when this happens. After all, if the paper is not suitable for the journal, the journal ought to desk reject immediately and save everyone's time.
I suggest writing to the editor and asking them if they're sure of their decision. After all, they did say minor revisions in the first decision. If they say they're sure there's nothing you can do but submit elsewhere, but there's a chance they'll agree they have been unfair.