That's probably a Doomsday way of looking at the situation, but perhaps that's the right way of looking at the situation because there are bad actors everywhere.
I don't worry too much about it, because of the "in good faith" clause. Not that I trust them, but
I trust the American claim culture enough to know it would end up in a lawsuit if they screw their customers.
What they said in their proposal, very clearly, is that they have the right to choose which fork they consider "Bitcoin". It won't necessarily be the fork with the highest value, or the fork what the community considers Bitcoin, or what their ETF holders consider "Bitcoin", OR what ANYONE ELSE considers as "Bitcoin".
They are their own entity giving themselves the power to consider which fork will be "Bitcoin". They can use that to start a hash war in my opinion.