Regardless, the attacks described here require large concentrations of mining power. In theory, the best way to attack it would be to wait for (or even encourage/subsidize) your country to become the geographical leader in mining operations.
Or even better: Wait for companies in competing countries to start holding BTC on their balance sheets and consumers to put their investments in BTC. Now you have a kill switch for part of the balance sheets of competing countries.
I personally doubt this is happening, but I’m sure it’s being considered as an attack scenario.
2. Traceable currency.
3. Soft power / control of narrative? Bitcoin seems to symbolize people's loss of faith in fiat system, and their governments.
Cryptocurrencies aren't very anonymous.
Citation needed on this one I'm afraid. If nothing else, a currency that the Party cannot control would be A Problem. China did not have much economic benefit in halting the ANT IPO, yet it did not go through all the same. There _might_ be a benefit in allowing bitcoin to continue to exist of course, if they think it advances their cause more than it hurts it. But as soon as that calculus changes, it seems quite likely that the big mining corps (with as you say at the moment of speaking about 65% of total hash rate) will receive some "friendly invitations" (from unfriendly people with guns) to stop their business operations.