Well, most of the world doesn't have big air forces. Modern fighters are just too expensive. those 20-50 combat a/c sized forces are only good for so much, and even 150-200 a/c sized forces realistically are good only for a successful, intensive campaign...which isn't a reliable risk management strategy.NEBO-U radar hit by drone. Likely long range strike?
Not really. It only applies to nations with no air force or air superiority. You bring up Armenia and Azerbaijan if the current conflict got bigger involving Iran and Turkey going after each other, which is a very likely possibility, Iran's drone warfare it would try to unleash would not work against Turkey because of their huge modern air force. Turkey would control the skies of that region with their E-7T-AEW&C.
If Russia's huge "modern" air force had air superiority over Ukraine, at least the eastern/central part, we would not be talking about drones as much as we are in this conflict. Russia wouldn't need all these drones if they controlled Ukraine air space. Training Ukraine's army and giving them the armor the west has been giving them would be useless and likely would have never happened.
Moreover, as we have discovered, in large(and conflict-prone) part of the world, air defenses tend to dominate air attack(and sides are largely content with launching ever-increasing amounts of stand-off from the safety of their AD shield).
And large international forces won't interfere.
We still haven't seen a fight between two powerful&reasonably modern, air-centric powers. Greece v Turkey could become one, but luckily hasn't.
On top of the cake - we still haven't seen much true stealth interactions.