I think you will find that pretty much being another nations bitch tends to reduce international authority, diplomacy, and economic strength, rather than reinforce it. It has a lot less to do with nationalism and a lot more to do with being able to act with independents.
An interesting point is that nationalism of the traditional sort; strong patriotism, the importance of ethnicity, heritage, history, all that stuff - that's the kind of thing the "Better Together" campaign (A.K.A the pretentiously titled No to Independence Campaign) are trying to push down our throats. The stuff that you would recognise as traditional nationalism is mostly British or Unionist.
They're the ones who had beef with the issue of Scots abroad not being able to vote in the referendum. The SNP took the stance that the only people who should vote in the referendum are people who live in Scotland because that's who it will affect. It won't really affect Jock Mackay over in California or Corby, North Hampshire. The Unionists were really pushing for that because they believed that Scots abroad would be more likely to vote No, which is amusing because they criticised the SNP for doing the same thing by giving the vote to 16 and 17 year olds, allegedly because they would be more supportive of independence in their young naivity. Despite such patronizations from the Unionists, their theory doesn't seem to be the case given polling results.
In any case, what gives Jock Mackay down in North Hampshire or over in New Zealand more of a right to vote in the referendum than the old Sardar doctor in a local medical practise in Govan? He came all the way over here from Pakistan just to work as a doctor and found he wanted to stay here for the rest of his life, raised his kids here, all that. Why does he now have to compete with Jock Mackay's "magical birth right"?
From the pro-independence camp on the other hand, the majority of our arguments are based around social or economic issues. Unionists are trying to concentrate on identity politics and stuff like national pride, pride in the Queen, pride in our "shared history" and all sorts of things. If you understand British history you'd know that is playing with fire.
But doesn't it suit you too? Y'know, the established international authority, diplomacy, and economic strength? Does your nationalism trounce all the other benefits?
The idea that things like "established international authority" actually has any relevance to the working lives of people in Scotland smacks far more of nationalism than most of the stuff you're criticising.