I don’t know if you have posted anything about the International Telecommunications Union, which is what ICANN would most likely answer to, and the proposals in their 2012 world conference. The proposed changes to the treaty at that time was firmly rejected by congress on a bipartisan basis and not signed by U.S. What a difference a few years makes.
Of course you know more about this than I do, thanks for continuing to bring attention to this.
‘... the treaty at that time was firmly rejected by congress on a bipartisan basis ...’
I don’t know the specifics of the International Telecommunications Union. If China likes it, then there’s a chance it’s involved. ICANN would be a free agent, so our senate would have no say about who they sign a contract with.