The topic selected for your project is a very interesting and under-explored one in recent historiography despite the intense grip The Troubles held over the British and Western public consciousness. What stands out is of course its emphasis of the transnational framework through which Ulster Unionism must be analysed, such an approach feels entirely absent from the public view of The Troubles, in comparison to the Republican side whose connections to things such as the Irish diaspora in America are a far more well-known fact. From my understanding, the project asks how Ulster unionists cultivated international support and legitimacy during the Troubles, and how their rhetoric and public outreach were deliberately adapted for non-Ulsterite audiences.
Your explicit contrast between the uneven application of transnational history to Republicanism and Ulster Unionism shows that you yourself are not unaware of the historical niche your chosen topic sits within. I also think the proposal is particularly strong in challenging the long-standing assumption of Unionism as a parochial, internationally-reclusive movement by investigating the very real attempts made by its proponents to achieve a similar scale of international support as was achieved by Irish Republicans.
The proposed source base is another real strength, a topic such as this thrives off of primary sources: speeches, pamphlets, advertising campaigns, political appearances and tours make the sheer breadth of available sources almost endless. Ulster: The Facts is particularly useful because it points to the kind of source that could reveal how unionists consciously fashioned their message for foreign audiences. The inclusion of murals as a possible source is also very interesting, I must admit I would not have thought to them at all. One possible further method of analysis could be to engage more explicitly with historiographical shifts in the study of Ulster Unionism as an ideology, such as how scholars have extrapolated its political language and relationship into the modern day. This might help more firmly situate the project within existing debates about Ulster Unionism and Unionism in general and simultaneously reinforce the significance and necessity of a transnational approach to the topic.
Overall, this is a very strong proposal that identifies a clear historiographical gap and proposes a valuable analysis of it utilising an impressive range of sources. Its emphasis on rhetoric, persuasion, and international image-making gives it the potential to make an important contribution to the study of the Troubles and to transnational Ulsterite history.