Aren't these totally different things? I mean, one thing is occupying a part of another country and totally different is that you want to keep all people of colour out of your country?
The parallel I was drawing was that all four neglect/violate post-1945 borders:
1) Blowing up Yugoslavia with pumping/propping up ethnic tensions, recognition of Kosovo;
2) Blowing up USSR into 15 "States" some of them not quite full-blown ones, with only half of them really independent;
2) Refusal to recognise Russian Crimea+Sevastopol despite them being Russian in 1945 (and Sevastopol being Soviet in 1991);
3) Propaganda that all migrants should be freely admitted on US South border.
There could be more examples. The basic idea here is: transnational capital has no borders, so stop shouting about need to defend them.
I may be missing something here, but why stop shouting about defending borders because of transnational capital?
How about caring about the southern US/Mexico border strictly for crime control, in terms of murder, rape, drugs?