Just out of interest, what would everyone on here give Larkin for his hit? Bearing in mind the CHL can only ban him for CHL games, he has effectively been banned for 2/3rds of the group phase. I don't think you can realistically give him more than 6 games.
I think the reason Brynäs is talking about boycotting the CHL is reflective of a general displeasure of the entire system. In Sweden a hit like Larkins would have resulted in a 20-30 game suspension, and a signigitanfly longer suspension for Simpson for unprofessional conduct. The fact that the CHL is unable to protect players and keep maintain accountability adds even more fuel to be fire that the CHL hurts its participants in domestic competitions. Then add the fact that the SHL is the biggest source of funding of the CHL, which creates a feeling of superiority. I.e, "how dare you hurt our players, dont you know who we are!?".
Anyway, to answer your question, I think SHL-teams would be fairly understanding if the CHL acknowledged that the entire system around suspensions needed to be overlooked - including some agreement with the international federations of suspensions also applying to domestic competition if a team was eliminated. At least as long as the CHL is considered a secondary competition. The outrage is primarily about a lack of disciplinary accountability, with added overtones of a more general displeasure of the entire competition.
I should also add that Brynäs states that they feel like the consequences of a hit like that would differ based on nationality, as a Swedish player would certainly been suspended by the domestic federation even if it occurred during international play. There could definitely be an aspect of BS in this sentiment, but considering that Swedish hockey is relatively forward-thinking (value-judgment) in terms of these sort of things I tend to believe that.
