I have always insisted on the fact that these both war stages were strategically linked. It would be silly to believe that the Syrian situation has nothing to do with the stalemate in East Ukraine. Historically both areas are so-called “gateway regions” on the rimlands around the Russian dominated heartland as the US geostrategist Saul B. Cohen could demonstrate in his works. As the globalist geopolitics of the United States aims at preventing any Pan-Eurasian synergies in the Old World (or on the World Island to take over MacKinder’s vocabulary) or any long term cooperation between Central Europe and Russia, it’s quite natural to let organize by dubious proxies skirmishes or long term wars on territories that could have an important linking function between major regions on the Eurasian continent. The present-day Ukrainian territory East of Crimea linked Europe (represented by the Genoese and Venetian commercial bases) to Asia at the time of Marco Polo, the great Mongol Khans or even later. The Syrian coast was the entrance gate to the long land roads to India and China. The vital necessity to control it, lead to the eight crusades Western Europe waged during our Middle Ages (Spengler explained why the notion of Middle Ages is only valid for Europe).
According to List, who thought in multipolar continental terms and favoured soft unification projects under the lead of technological development, the role of the State was to sponsor communication to help developing and creative private industrial and technological forces to thrive (Schumpeter). In this sense, List was a “constructive liberal”, a figurehead of a non conservative efficient praxis that could have annihilated the negative aspects of common liberal ideology.