What do you understand by jingoism? Is it in the best interest of the country? Substantiate with logical arguments. (200 Words)
Jingoism can be defined as aggressive nationalism. Jingoism translates into a feeling of superiority particularly in military matters and demands aggressive actions or conflict to resolve even small differences with other countries.
Grave matters like a country’s foreign policy needs to be the result of careful deliberations of pros and cons of a particular action. It should be an outcome of wide spread discussions amongst the political class, the diplomats, the administrators, the defense forces, academics, think tanks etc. Such an evolution of foreign policy will ensure that it has the entire country’s support and will safeguard the country’s vital interests.
On the other hand, by its very definition, Jingoism is emotional. It calls for a very aggressive posture which can lead to more problems than solutions. Foreign policy is affected by everything that a country does. Thus, even in the absence of any aggressive action, even jingoistic statements by people can impact its foreign policy. An example of this would be the displeasure by authorities in Myanmar to India after statements about an operation conducted by Indian military forces.
As seen in case of Nazi Germany, Jingoism was detrimental to not only Germany but also brought loss to most parts of the world with extensive damage to lives and property. Nations should strive for maximization of their national interest but not through use of violence and war but through peace and treaty.
Jingoistic comments act as a trigger which harden the stance of even friendly foreign countries and makes them wary about our intentions. Specifically, in case of Pakistan, jingoistic statements in India strengthen the extremist elements there along with increasing support for the Pakistani army. This makes the resolution of problems between the two countries that much harder.
While every citizen must be patriotic, being jingoistic serves no higher purpose and the government must ensure that it disavows such sentiments immediately and does not give any credence to them. Countries like India who have past record of being a peace-loving nation should endeavour to infuse morality and ethical standards in practice of international relations. Idea of internationalism and one world (‘Vasudhaiv kutumbkam’) as articulated by our various heads of state should be our goal in the realm of foreign relations.