IT IS GENERALLY CONCLUDED THAT EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE COMPREHENSIVE INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT ON MEASURES AGAINST INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM THROUGH THE UNITED NATIONS HAVE FAILED UP UNTIL NOW. IN THIS REVIEW OF UNITED NATIONS PROCEEDINGS ON THE SUBJECT SINCE 1972, THE PRINCIPAL ISSUES FACED BY THE PARTICIPANTS ARE PRESENTED. CHIEF AMONG THESE WAS THE QUESTION OF THE SCOPE AND EFFECT OF A CONDEMNATION OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM. THE PARTIES WERE UNABLE TO REACH AN AGREEMENT ON WHAT THE TERM 'INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM' SHOULD INCLUDE BECAUSE OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECT OF A CONDEMNATION OF EXISTING STRUGGLES FOR NATIONAL LIBERATION AND SELF-DETERMINATION. NO AGREEMENT COULD BE REACHED ON WHAT WOULD BE A PERMISSIBLE LEVEL OF VIOLENCE FOR THE ACHIEVEMENT OF POLITICAL ENDS AND THE PARTIES WERE UNABLE TO DECIDE ON A COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF THE DEFINITION OF 'INNOCENT VICTIMS.' IT IS BELIEVED THAT A STEP-BY-STEP EFFORT TO REACH CONSENSUS ON THE CONDEMNATION OF SPECIFIC ACTS OF TERRORISM, SUCH AS TAKING OF HOSTAGES AND THE DISPATCHING OF LETTER BOMBS, MIGHT HAVE BORNE MORE FRUIT. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--RCB)