
Just submitted my abstract so now am working on the writing T_T
The first part will be the definition on strategic stability, which I will include Hoeber (1968), Kokoshin & Kortunov (1987), Zhong and Pan (2004), Loo (2005), and Delpech (2001).
I think I need to give more of my analysis and opinion this time, which I lack of doing so in my literature review writing.
My conclusion on the definition (the working definition for my research) is:
Strategic stability is a condition that minimises the possibility of accidental or inadvertent wars breaking out between adversarial states, where policy-makers do not face unavoidable pressures to make sudden shifts from non-violent to violent strategies, and in which various strategic forces in the world are able to establish and sustain a strategic framework for basic relations between and among them.
Next, I will talk about the military-strategic aspect of the strategic stability. this will be the intersting part because I will be:
looking at the crises occurred in 1994, the local military balance is more important than general regional balance of power, because the high level of military preparedness and confidence in intelligence systems displayed by the US-ROK military alliance has helped to maintain the regional strategic stability.
I will give empirical evidence such as the data and facts and events on KPA (Korean People's Army-North Korea) vs ROKAF (Republic of Korea Arms Force-South Korea) and USFK (United States Force Korea) along the DMZ (Demilitarized Zone). Intersting facts such as the tunnels and the intelligence information will be part of my presentation.
Oh, headache. I need to write and prepare for presentation at the same time. Need to get them done before I go to Tasmania.
Praying hard for my Korea Foundation's grant application.
The result will be revealed in early November.
I want to obtain the Korea Foundation's research grant.
I will conduct field work in South Korea next year.
Amen.