Although the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee on Terrorism has been trying since 1972 to draft an acceptable convention that would limit the spread of terrorism on an international level, it has yet to produce even an acceptable definition of terrorism. Efforts to control terrorism through prosecution of criminal acts are hampered by the political nature of terrorist acts which claim a measure of support from governments and individuals. The recent efforts of some States to establish privileged categories of combatants using the concept of just cause opposes the current humanitarian trend in international law. Any legal approach to controlling terror-violence must distinguish between terrorism which is essentially criminal, and rebellion or revolution, which are recognized remedies under international law. Attempts have been made to bring terrorism under the laws of war, but they do not address the nature of terrorism as deliberate acts of violence against innocent and uninvolved civilians for political gain. Acts of terrorism aim to demonstrate the govenment's lack of ability to protect its citizens, thus reaching those in power who are most protected from personal attack. As long as some States consider terrorism a legitimate expression of political dissent and as long as world order is subordinate to national interests, there can be no effective international control of terrorism. A total of 38 footnotes are included.