AIRCRAFT HIJACKING INVOLVES A WIDER RANGE OF ACTIONS AND MOTIVATIONS THAN SIMPLE PIRACY, BUT GOVERNMENTS, AIRLINES, AND THE PUBLIC HAVE BEEN RELUCTANT TO RECOGNIZE THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE PROBLEM. STATISTICALLY THE RISK OF HIJACKING IS QUITE LOW, AND COUNTRIES HAVE ADOPTED PREVENTIVE MEASURES ONLY WHEN SEVERAL HIJACKINGS HAVE OCCURRED IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. AIRLINE OPERATIONS ARE NOT GUIDED SOLELY BY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS, AND COMPANIES HAVE NOT REACTED STRONGLY TO EXPENSES INCURRED BY HIJACKINGS. PROSECUTION OF HIJACKERS HAS OFTEN BEEN PREVENTED BY POLITICAL TACTICS, SUCH AS ASYLUM PRIVILEGES AND BLACKMAIL USING HOSTAGES. SEVERAL INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS, HOWEVER, ARE NOW IN EFFECT WHICH ATTEMPT TO REGULATE HIJACKING. THE 1963 TOKYO CONVENTION ESTABLISHED JURISDICTIONAL PROCEDURES AND PROVISIONS TO FACILITATE INTERRUPTED FLIGHTS FOR 63 STATES. THE 1970 HAGUE CONVENTION DEFINED THE CRIME OF HIJACKING AND COMMITTED ITS 52 SIGNATORIES TO EXTRADITION OR PROSECUTION OF THE OFFENDERS. UNLAWFUL ACTS COMMITTED ON AIRPLANES OTHER THEN SEIZURE OF CONTROL WERE TREATED IN THE 1971 MONTREAL CONVENTION. BILATERAL AGREEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE WITH THOSE STATES WHO ARE NOT PARTY TO ANY CONVENTIONS, SUCH AS CUBA. ALTHOUGH THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER NATIONS HAVE ENACTED LAWS WHICH MAKE HIJACKING A SERIOUS CRIME WITH A HEAVY PENALTY, ENFORCEMENT HAS BEEN INEFFECTIVE. RECOMMENDATIONS TO REDUCE HIJACKING ATTEMPTS INCLUDE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FOLLOWING: INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS FOR AIRPORT AND FLIGHT SECURITY, SANCTIONS AGAINST THOSE STATES WHO DO NOT ADHERE TO THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS ON HIJACKING, AND AN INTERNATIONAL COURT FOR HIJACKING AND TERRORIST CASES. (MJM)