I agree that my start point is not comparable to the ND position, but it is not my intent to construct any such comparison. I have just the narrow aim of testing whether, from where I stand now, I can up my carbs without detriment. I do already know from previous experimentation that my 3 months on 100g (ending with A1c=42) followed by 3 months on 135g left my A1c virtually unaltered (ending with A1c=40). And I agree that going up to 180g will hardly be radical - but it might allow me some welcome extra latitude. Your 200g is a very good level. I too weigh 64kg.
The matter of the 2-year DiRECT remitters: I may be in error, but my reading of the published data (e.g. in the 2019 paper in Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology, 7(5), pp. 344-355, and also in other papers) is that at 24 months 53 (36%) of the intervention participants (total 149 at baseline) had remission of diabetes, being a subset of those 68 who had been in remission at 12 months. So I don't see where your 6.8% comes from. I also am not clear about the medication factor within the intervention cohort - there are some ambiguities among the various papers.
I sense that the DiRECT investigators take the view that those T2Ds who are very carb-intolerant, and so really do need to keep their carbs well down, are in that position for any of several reasons, including (a) they never did clear their ectopic fat, or (b) they did, but did so too long after diagnosis, or (c) they have some other or additional metabolic deficiency, or (d) are just inexplicably unlucky. And equally I sense that their view is that those who achieve "real" remission, having become normoglycaemic purely through clearing ectopic fat, have no need whatever to even think about carbs subsequently, never mind reduce them. But whether they are right, I cannot tell.