the answer for this question may not be the exact one because the answer for this question is a debatable one.
according to me interference of other countries must be there ,but to a limited extent. our interference should not make the country feel stupid about us ,.i.e. in short the interference of the country should be limited.
but complete ignorance of our neighbouring countries may develop a feeling of alienation among us.
broad foreign affairs doctrine held by people who belived that theire own nation is best served by holding the affairs of the other nations at distance
Interfering in another country's affairs can violate its sovereignty and lead to conflict or instability. It can also be seen as imposing one's own values rather than respecting the autonomy and self-determination of that nation. International relations are based on principles of mutual respect and non-interference to ensure peace and cooperation among nations.
France
Generally speaking the responsibilities of a citizen are to vote and obey the laws of the nation. In democratic nations, citizens have a duty to either take part in civic affairs and, or stay abreast of the affairs of government.
what does the united nation logo stands for
The plural form of "nation" is "nations."
She does not, she is only a titular sovereign, (in name only, a symbolic authority, the power lies with your elected politicians). In fact, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth ll is excluded from any position of power in Australia under UK law. The United Nations Charter and Articles states - No Member Nation State of the United Nations may use, alter or otherwise tamper with the laws of another Member Nation State of the United Nations. This was the case before the United Nations organisation existed. Paraphrased, the U.N. Charter states that no country may interfere in the internal affairs of any state or nation, a clause that is conveniently ignored by the USA and other countries when it suits them.
America's interfering in world affairs a lot, but if you look at Russia's 'take-over' of Crimea, they are in a sense, telling the population what to do.
There could be several terms that would define one nation staying out of the affairs of other nations. After World War I, the US entered a period of "isolationism" because of the thousands of US troops killed in the war that seemed to accomplish little, in the minds of the American public, and never did fulfill President Wilson's goal of making the world "safe for democracy." Non-intervention is another term that means not taking sides or getting involved in the affairs of another nation. Then there is also the term "neutral nation" when it refers to a nation that does not take sides during a war between other nations.
He did not have a "problem" with any nations. He in fact declared in his farewell speech at the end of his presidency, that for a prosperous nation, to refrain from intervening in foreign affairs. Which means he advised to not become involved with any other countries.
A nation that rules over other nations, known as a dominant or conquering nation, is the founder of an empire of nations.
Of course, a nation should have both because a nation will not have freedom if it doesn't have the ability to govern. The ability to govern is to make freedom for the nation and to make a nation independent.