> Part of the rules allows them to revoke the whole block back
Oh right, and then what.
Are they going to prevent the ISP from originating the route? Are they going to use RPKI to stop the route propagating?
Either way, they're doing exactly what the plan was supposed to avoid: disconnecting the country from the Internet. So that seems pretty counter-productive to me.
Basically this is using IPv4 scarcity as a political lever, which I guess is an opportunity to encourage IPv6 deployment. After all, your initial v6 allocation is likely to last you many years if you deploy it wisely. So this makes you less beholden to the whim of registries as you expand.
Corrupt countries leading the way in IPv6 - who'd have thunk it?
Besides, who's judge and jury in the registry, making these political judgements? Having seen how ICANN have behaved over the last few years, maybe a tinpot dictator is preferable.