I think this is also missing a critical piece - the interaction between force projection and intelligence.
Iran went hard out of the gate to disable significant portions of enemy military installations, and the US pulled a lot of materiel out in response. If the high value assets are moved out of reach, and Iran knows it, then there's fewer high value targets to hit.
But also, by lulling the enemy into a false sense of security, the enemy can be induced to engage in activities that otherwise they would not. Things like repair, recovery, or even potential cases of hardened underground facilities becoming activated and thus revealing themselves. Iran may be observing the enemy to see where they move their attention when the threat is reduced, which provides them with invaluable intelligence.
Some are demanding the reinstatement of all treaties. Some say that most treaties were signed under duress after the illegitimate use of violence created conditions of dispossession and displacement. There are other positions. They are not all mutually exclusive.
Would respecting the treaties be sufficient for sovereignty? I don't know, but my limited understanding is that it is a necessary condition but not a sufficient condition.