本論文的目的是以現實主義的角度探究領域外庇護的深層內涵，了解國際社會為何遲遲未下定論的真實原因，並佐以哥倫比亞與秘魯庇護案和美國與匈牙利庇護案作分析，在綜合理解諸多面向之後彙整出領域外庇護的未來發展方向。 The asylum issue of international law mostly discussed is territorial asylum not exterritorial asylum, because the latter involves complicated aspects and is still under disputes. Presently, international law referring to exterritorial asylum is still a circumstance hung in the balance.
Territorial asylum has been followed for years and was recognized as legal behavior by international law. In addition to its legitimacy in international law, diplomatic asylum has plenty of unknown interests involved and produces a lot of disputes. Nowadays, although it is not yet admitted by international law, Latin America recognizes it publicly and accounts it for a custom. Furthermore, in other countries, like United States, these specific practices do exist although United States always claims to respect the spirit and rule of international law. These conflicting attitudes in some countries are enough to prove that diplomatic asylum contains some attraction to those countries. Therefore, the meaning of diplomatic asylum exceeded the pure asylum action that a country realizes and it''s not only a problem about the interpretation of the definition or the rules of international law.
The major proposition of this thesis is to analyze the deeper dimension of diplomatic asylum by the perspective of realism. To inquire the true reason why international society is tardily to conclude this issue, taking the Colombian-Peruvian Asylum Case as an example, and finally, to integrate as much as possible all the dimensions of this problem in order to describe the future development of diplomatic asylum.