In the short (for the purposes of my argument, we'll say anything shorter than 800m, but it can apply) distances, there are 7 events (100, 200, 400, 110/100h, 400h, 4x100, & 4x400) at major championships. I personally include most jumps here because the required energy systems and fitness are either equivalent or translatable (especially LJ/TJ where there are many examples of athletes who perform well in both track and field) so there are effectively 11 events that require a strength and conditioning, non aerobic style of training in track and field. 12 if you want to count decathlon, but I think both distance runners and sprinters know that's another ball game altogether.
The reality that many distance runners tend to shrug off but are now having to defend because of the IAAF's ridiculous decision making regarding the diamond league and Olympic/World standards is that track and field has always been biased against distance running, for whatever reason. There are only 5 distance events at major champs (probably soon to be 3-4) and given the removal of the 4x800 from world relays, not including a DMR or 4x1500 since 2015...it seems that your attitude is shared by many.
Distance running may be more exciting for some people on the road and XC surfaces, but my opinion is that the only reason for this is because you can move around on the event day, see different parts of the course, and get up close to the competitors. This actually happens in a lot of track distance races, and while it shouldn't be allowed at major meets, it does make meets more exciting. This is actually the way to save distance running, to promote more meets where fans can get up close and personal to long distance races, cheer for them, encourage them to run a hot pace, etc. Major champs are somewhat dry anyway, because there is so much on the line in each race and out of 6-32 people competing in an athletics final, only one gets the glory. The IAAF doesn't seem to realize that unless you have a Bolt or Farah sort of character at the olympics and worlds, most viewers won't know what the f*ck is going on anyway. Commentary sucks at these meets.
The only thing I would say to convince you (I was a sprinter myself) to appreciate distance track races is that they are exciting if you know how to watch them and understand there's more of a time investment in appreciating how they'll play out. A move someone makes at 4k in a 10k race could have serious consequences for them over the last 600-1000, etc, etc.
There is a practical reason, however, as to why to keep distance running available on the track, and that is so as you say, athletes can shine on the roads and XC. in general, the best runners on the roads and XC have had a small to legendary career on the track, and I think Eliud Kipchoge made a post wherein he said something along the lines of "my track career helped me be a better runner on the roads" and this is absolutely correct. I may have misparaphrased, though.