Why did they do to Skype what they did (first turn it from p2p to centralized and spyable and then just ignore it and let it die)?
Same reason.
I vaguely remember hearing that P2P Skype was the bane of sysadmins' existence. Skype would elect clients on high-bandwidth networks as supernodes. This tended to be business customers - the very organizations MS wanted to attract. Skype's prodigious hole-punching ability made it difficult to throttle, so it got banned from a lot of enterprises. MS essentially hosted the supernodes on Azure, which centralized it.
As for encryption, on the other hand, Wikipedia says MS specifically added the ability to eavesdrop for law enforcement agencies, though apparently Skype had already added a backdoor for the NSA before MS bought them: https://news.softpedia.com/news/Skype-Provided-Backdoor-Acce...
[1] - https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/Guid...
The big 4 will be seen as a hostile power within Europe? The big 4 ARE (mostly) European. What are you talking about?
Sales contracts? What do you mean in what context?
I agree that it would be cool if the original p2p Skype somehow resurfaces, but I can't make any sense of the rest of your post or what it has to do with the subject at hand?
They want narrative control and squashing rising political opposition.
I used to leave an extra old laptop on with it running, maybe 15 years ago, on a public address.
During the arab spring, tons of traffic could be seen connecting clients in north africa. It truly did route around things.