Bush, Criticized on Home Front, Drops Asia Trip

On the eve of his second trip to Europe in just 10 days, President Bush abruptly canceled plans late Tuesday to travel to Asia later this month as criticism mounted that he is paying too much attention to foreign policy at the expense of economic problems at home.

White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater cited the press of congressional business as the reason for the unusual--and diplomatically touchy--decision to cancel the extended tour to Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Australia, which was to have begun on Nov. 27.

“The President regrets this decision but believes that uncertainty over the congressional calendar requires this change,” Fitzwater said. “At this point, where the economy is sluggish and we’ve got important economic legislation coming through at the end of this session--that’s what it is we want to be here to deal with.”

Among the issues on the congressional agenda are consideration of measures to extend unemployment payments for jobless workers whose benefits have expired and deliberations over a not-yet-final economic growth package.

As Bush prepared to depart today for a North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit in Rome--he just returned from the opening session of the Middle East peace conference in Madrid last Wednesday--Secretary of State James A. Baker III leaped to his defense against criticism that Bush has been neglecting domestic affairs.

Such attacks, Baker said, “would only be valid if there were a failure on his part to address domestic concerns, and I don’t think there has been a failure.”

Baker’s willingness to openly enter the political fray, even in such a gentle manner, reflected the sensitivity within the President’s inner circle toward the criticism. The secretary of state has studiously avoided political statements for two years as inappropriate to his diplomatic role.

The Asian trip had been in the planning stage for much of the year. Indeed, there had been talk of an Australian trip as early as 1989. From Australia, Bush was scheduled to fly to Hawaii to mark the 50th anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7.

The most sensitive diplomatic ramifications, however, are likely to result from the cancellation of the visit to Japan. Bush was last there in February, 1989, shortly after he took office. He attended the funeral of Emperor Hirohito.

The Japanese already had begun complaining that Bush was planning to spend too little time there and was not showing them proper respect, given their economic superpower status.

Fitzwater said that the host countries were being sent cables Tuesday evening notifying them of Bush’s change in plans. A new trip will be arranged, he said, “as soon as possible.”

In Tokyo--where a new government was installed Tuesday, one that was expected to be more blunt and potentially confrontational with Americans--Japanese officials did not have time to prepare an official response to the postponement, but unofficially many said they were disturbed.

“We were very surprised,” said one Foreign Ministry official. “We are embarrassed. It was so sudden. We had made all kinds of preparations, and a lot of people were involved.”

Mitsuya Goto, managing director of the Japan Center for International Exchange, which has as part of its mission promoting U.S.-Japan ties, observed: “It is kind of shocking. Now that we have a new prime minister (Kiichi Miyazawa), it would have been a good occasion for them” to begin talking.

Japanese officials had previously expressed disappointment at the decision to keep the trip short.

In the United States, the criticism of Bush’s travels began to heat up in tandem with the Democratic presidential campaigns.

The Democratic National Committee began selling T-shirts saying, “George Bush went to Rome--and all I got was this lousy recession.” California Rep. Vic Fazio (D-West Sacramento), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, unfurled one Tuesday on the House floor, the Associated Press reported.

“How can he find solutions to the problems of America’s children in Rome? The President should be in Rome, Miss., where the unemployment rate stands at over 11%,” Fazio said.

The Democrats’ campaign, begun earlier in the autumn, apparently has struck a sympathetic note among some voters.

A national poll by The Times, conducted Sept. 21-25 among 1,643 Americans, found 76% agreeing that Bush was paying “too much attention to foreign affairs and not enough attention to problems here at home.” Twenty-one percent disagreed.

When he arrives in Rome, Bush will be eager to leave his imprint on a new NATO strategy that would give the United States a continuing strong hand in European affairs, while shifting the organization’s emphasis toward countering ethnic rivalries, Third World conflicts and terrorism.

The new balance will result in a lower level of U.S. troops in Europe and a greater role for Western Europe in its own defense.

Times staff writers John M. Broder and Douglas Jehl in Washington and Leslie Helm in Tokyo contributed to this report.