I think your latter point is correct, though whether Zuckerberg can make Apple feel any hurt remains to be seen. Personally, I think there is too much stink on Facebook at this point for them to regain any credibility.
Facebook is saying that if subscribers use the promotional link rather than the IAP option, then the creator gets 100% of the revenue. They seem to be trying to bait Apple into denying this functionality so they can say Apple is hurting the little guy; that Apple, not Facebook, is the Goliath to the creators' David. The talking points and justifications for the 30% fee are the weakest link in Apple's public relations messaging, and so Zuckerberg is trying to exploit that to Facebooks advantage. It's an attempt to drag another company's image down to their level because their's is irreparably damaged. I won't be surprised if Facebook soon targets other companies as well.
Note, I'm not calling them Meta. The whole name change is a cynical, transparent, and arrogant PR stunt to disassociate the company from the harm its core components cause. It's the same crap Google tried to pull with 'Alphabet,' but most of us, thankfully, still call them Google.
The name change is like 'Altria'. Phillip Morris by any other name is still a company that markets a product that if you use it correctly, it will kill you. It's cynical, and it works.