Japan Refuses to Talk Trade Under Duress

Japan declared Friday that it will refuse to negotiate trade issues with Washington under duress but offered to seek solutions to American complaints that are presented without threats of retaliation.

Three government officials separately rejected any negotiations based upon Washington’s decision to retaliate against Japan under last year’s Omnibus Trade Act if Japan fails to correct practices that keep American supercomputers, communications satellites and forestry products out of its markets.

Joint Committee

At the same time, officials said Japan would accept a separate proposal by President Bush to establish a joint high-level committee to examine structural impediments to trade as long as Washington agrees to discuss problems on the American, as well as the Japanese, side.

Japan’s apparent willingness to begin such talks was regarded as welcome news in Washington. Despite all the bluster about possible sanctions, Bush Administration officials had considered the bid for broader talks as the real heart of the Administration’s new trade moves, with far greater potential for eliminating the imbalances between the two countries.

In Washington, as he prepared to leave Friday on a trip to Europe, Bush urged Japan, India and Brazil--all three were named Thursday in his trade complaint for allegedly unfair practices--to “work constructively with us to resolve these issues expeditiously.” He reiterated that the Administration’s goal is only “to open markets and to eliminate trade barriers. We oppose protectionism in any and all forms,” he said.

Tokyo nevertheless was insistent Friday in rejecting the Administration’s attempts to launch formal proceedings against Japan. “We will not accept any negotiations proposed in the framework of Section 301 (of the Omnibus Trade Act), with its threat of unilateral measures,” said Chief Cabinet Secretary Keizo Obuchi.

Virtually the same words were used by Hiroshi Mitsuzuka, minister of international trade and industry, and Taizo Watanabe, the Foreign Ministry’s spokesman.

In addition, Tsutomu Hata, agriculture and forestry minister, said that Japan will refuse to negotiate forestry product complaints under threats of retaliation.

Foreign Minister Sosuke Uno described the American decision, announced by U.S. Trade Representative Carla A. Hills, as unilateral and unfair in view of “the fact that the United States itself maintains import restrictive measures and practices to a considerable degree.”

Uno also summoned newly arrived Ambassador Michael H. Armacost to condemn the move as “an attempt to divert attention from the major cause of the trade imbalance and to eschew the responsibilities of the United States in macro-economic policies”--the “huge (American) budget deficit,” in particular.

Bush’s decision drew plaudits Friday from American business groups. In Washington, the National Assn. of Manufacturers called the action “a major victory for American manufacturers.” And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said the Administration’s action showed the value of the new trade law in “opening foreign markets.”

In Japan, the reaction of the Japanese business community was similarly acerbic and unapologetic.

Mitsuzuka said the U.S. decision represented “merely an act of the U.S. government in implementing its domestic law.” Japan, he added, has no obligation to take up problems created domestically in the United States.

The trade minister, however, added that Japan “wants to avoid starting a Japan-U.S. trade war,” and offered to negotiate with the United States in a forum of the Geneva-based General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the 96-country organization set up to govern world trade. Bilateral negotiations “without a threat of sanctions in the background” also would be acceptable, he added.

Uno, likewise, said Japan is prepared “to solve whatever problems may arise between the two countries through quiet talks and joint cooperation.”

Other Foreign Ministry officials said they hope to persuade both the prime minister and foreign minister, who will be named after outgoing Prime Minister Noboru Takeshita steps down, to make early trips to Washington to resolve frictions. (Takeshita last month announced his intention to resign to accept responsibility for an influence-buying scandal that has rocked Japan’s political world.)

Japanese officials did not mention it in their public comments, but all three areas of trade singled out by Hills represented issues on which Japan and the United States had already conducted negotiations and had reached agreements accepted by the Ronald Reagan Administration.

Uno insisted that none of the “priority practices” singled out by Hills represent trade barriers and declared that Japan has already become “a widely open market.”

In an attempt to back up Uno’s statement, the government issued a briefing paper saying that U.S. firms have sold to Japan four telecommunications satellites and 67 supercomputers, seven of them to government-affiliated organizations.

Government-affiliated organizations, the paper said, were planning to buy eight more supercomputers. “We hope U.S. bidders will respond positively,” it added.

Times staff writer Art Pine, in Washington, contributed to this story.