ABSTRACT
This conclusion presents some closing thoughts on key concepts discussed in the preceding chapters of this book. The book reviews the analytical implications for each of the constitutive conditions of the practice of humanitarian space, and then the practice's critical potentials in international politics today. It highlights different and more radical potentials of safe areas. Firstly, Deng's position is contrary to the character of the shelter model, which is compatible with the territorial integrity of a particular state. Deng's theory implies that a shelter is created with a view to breaching a state's territorial integrity. The book then highlights the point that a shelter can be compatible with a particular state's territorial integrity. Secondly, because its critical potential lies in its alien character, the shelter model is intended not towards the reinforcement/modification but replacement of the prevailing practice. One could argue that humanitarianism, after a brief period of activism and convergence with human rights, has returned to its origin.
