STEVEN C. CLEMONS, Executive director, Japan America Society of Southern California

U.S.-Japanese relations are once again being tested. Remarks by Japanese leaders alleging inferior U.S. workers and products--views widely held in Japan but rarely spoken publicly--have inflamed many Americans. Steven C. Clemons said the controversy may pass but will resurface unless fundamental changes occur in the bilateral relationship. Clemons, who runs a 6,000-member trade group from Los Angeles and Costa Mesa, discussed future U.S.-Japanese economic relations in an interview with Times staff writer Cristina Lee.

How do most Japanese executives in Orange County feel about Japan’s latest criticism of U.S. labor and products?

Most of them say they are embarrassed by their government.

What are they doing to counter the negative publicity?

Very little. The typical Japanese businessman does not engage in politics.

There’s a famous saying in Japan: The nail that sticks out gets hit on the head. So, very few Japanese speak their mind. Most Japanese general managers in the United States hold mid-level positions in their company’s worldwide operations, and their opinions don’t hold much water in their corporate headquarters.

So someone like Tachi Kiuchi, who’s chairman of Mitsubishi Electronics America (in Cypress), is extraordinarily courageous by speaking out about his embarrassment and his frustrations at Japanese business and government leaders who have been making those ridiculous statements. But then Kiuchi is an anomaly in Orange County’s Japanese business community.

How will the latest string of controversies from Japan affect Japanese companies in Orange County?

This will make it difficult for Japanese managers to work cooperatively with their American employees. This means Japanese executives have to deal with external tension in the general community, as well as internal tension within their own work force.

It’s forcing many Japanese companies to ponder whether American economic nationalism is going to affect their sales and their ability to get large state and federal government public works contracts. It will force them to reconsider their investment strategy and overall presence in the United States.

The biggest challenges for Japanese companies in Orange County are going to be the availability of a good, stable and skilled work force and a community that is open to cultural diversity. One of the most critical issues will be the business climate--which is increasingly being strained by the state’s and county’s strict environmental codes, higher taxes and steep wages.

What is your group doing to improve American and Japanese mutual understanding?

The economic relationship is just one part of the issue. There is a tremendous amount of economic bonding between the United States and Japan, but our social bonding is at zero level. My job is to provoke both sides to pay more attention to one another, so that the disparity between economic and social integration can be rectified.

You continue to make public remarks critical of Japanese business practices. Doesn’t this exacerbate current tensions?

Absolutely not. If anything, it relieves pressure that must be released by both sides. Basically, Americans and Japanese have become so complacent about their relationship in the past 45 years that they need to be shocked to focus on one of the world’s most important and critical relationships.

This relationship is undergoing major changes that have not been accompanied by changes in attitudes toward each other. We’ve been too polite and caught up with protocol for too long, and the relationship desperately needs honesty and candor on both sides. And I don’t know any other way to achieve that than to shoot straight with my questions and be honest with my responses.

Where are U.S.-Japanese relations headed?

U.S.-Japan relations are really entering a fundamentally different phase. Americans are beginning to measure themselves----their failures and successes, the quality of education and products, etc.--in terms of where Japan is.

For the first time since the end of World War II, Americans are looking at another country to gauge their economic state in the world. Other societies have always measured their development or state of affairs against the measuring stick of the United States.

The reality--that we conjure up Japan to get a sense of where we are--will grate against the American ego and produce long-term conflicts that will become a norm for relations between the two countries into the 21st Century.

The bilateral relationship will neither catastrophically rip apart nor return to the harmonious and blissful “big-brother/little-brother” relationship in the 1960s and 1970s.

What are your plans for the organization in the next five years?

I’m going to stop focusing exclusively on U.S.-Japan relations. Today, the relationship only means something in a global context.

We are used to thinking of the “U.S. versus them” model. That worked with the former Soviet Union. But the world is a complicated place today, and there are more than just two players in the international arena.

I plan to look at U.S.-Japan relations vis-a-vis Latin America, Eastern Europe, East Asia and Southeast Asia and other parts of the world.

Secondly, I think the U.S.-Japan relationship is over-intellectualized. In recent years, Americans have developed a negative image of the Japanese society. Probably the last pleasant image that Americans have of Japan was the song “Sukiyaki,” made popular in the 1960s.

Since then, the American image of Japan has come to mean U.S. trade deficit, decline of the American auto and electronics industries, Japanese politicians making racist remarks and Japanese protectionism.

I want to try some unique, avant-garde approaches to presenting American and Japanese images of each other, which do not presently exist in our media.

On current U.S.-Japan relations . . .

“Terrible. It’s like a dry forest waiting for a small match to set it afire.”

On Japan’s investments . . .

“The Fujitsus and Hitachis are flooding the world with products made everywhere. In that kind of environment, it’s easy to reduce your future commitment to invest in the U.S.”

On the trade group . . .

“The society was sort of shipwrecked-- rigor mortis was setting in--when I came in 1987. The 60 members, mostly retired people, did not reflect changing U.S.-Japan relations. It was a harmless culture club with $2,000 in the bank. We could barely pay ourselves or afford to buy pencils.”

On his job . . .

“My role is to be provocative and ask the most difficult questions, potentially embarrassing or controversial questions, of the guest speakers. That makes it easier for the audience to ask any questions.”