Vexing Asia Ties Cloud Clinton’s 1st Overseas Trip

President Clinton’s arrival in Tokyo this week for the annual meeting of the world’s seven leading economic powers inevitably will focus attention on the new Administration’s policy toward Japan and, more generally, Asia as a whole.

But amid Tokyo’s current political upheavals, Clinton’s trip is likely to demonstrate that the Administration is having trouble coming to grips with Japan, the world’s second-leading economic power, and with the dynamic East Asian region surrounding it.

As even a senior Administration official freely admitted in a recent interview, although the Administration has pieces of policies toward specific countries and issues in Asia, “What we don’t have yet is an articulation of an Asian policy or, certainly in an economic context, I would say a Pacific policy.”

Clinton and his aides would like to develop such a policy, and they heavily criticized the Bush Administration for failing to do so.

But with Japanese Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party in tatters and Tokyo in the midst of a new election campaign, Administration officials and scholars said the timing could hardly be worse for coming up with a comprehensive policy toward Asia--or even making progress with Japan.

One senior Administration official acknowledged last week, “It clearly is an obstacle that there is this turmoil going on in Japan at the time of the summit.”

William Watts, an Asia specialist and former staff member at the National Security Council, said: “In ordinary circumstances, an (economic) summit would give (Clinton) a chance to show his skill as an actor on the larger world stage. . . Unhappily, this summit comes at a moment when the Japanese political system is having its most profound crisis since World War II.”

The scant prospect for major progress is just one of the problems Clinton faces on his first overseas trip as President and his first appearance as the putative leader of the advanced industrial nations.

Clinton aides had hoped that the President’s proposals to reduce the federal budget deficit--a step that other nations have urged at past economic meetings--would increase his leverage this year. That, in fact, may have happened. But whatever increased leverage there may be has been offset by the weakness of the other governments present.

Not only is Japan’s government in the hands of lame ducks, but most of the other world leaders he will meet have abysmal standings in the polls or already have given up hope of reelection. The session, said former Assistant Secretary of State Robert D. Hormats, will be “a meeting of the world’s strongest countries but the world’s weakest leaders.”

As a result, top Clinton aides have spent much of the last few days intensively working to lower expectations for the summit, saying at every possible opportunity that Americans should not expect “breakthroughs” and that the President would be happy with “steady progress” on major issues facing the seven industrial powers: Japan, Britain, Canada, France, Italy, Germany and the United States.

“You have to understand the nature of summits. . . ,” Secretary of State Warren Christopher told reporters last week. “They are directional in nature.”

One senior official predicted, “On a scale of 1 to 10, this will be a 7.” But he quickly continued that “this is not an absolute scale; this is a relative scale compared to other summits,” which have seldom produced major results. “You don’t have to do much to beat average,” he added.

Without concrete agreements, the Administration is portraying the session as merely one part of Clinton’s push to create economic growth and jobs. Aides said they hope the meeting’s economic declaration will contain a commitment to coordinate policies for increased economic growth--including recognition by Japan that “its current account surpluses are unsustainable,” a senior official said.

“This is an opportunity for the President on the world stage to discuss issues on which he is extremely knowledgeable,” said Clinton’s top economic policy coordinator, Robert E. Rubin.

Another senior official said that Clinton hopes “to set the agenda for the next few years” for the seven countries, “if not for immediate results, then for long-term results.”

While Clinton may try to set the agenda, it is not clear whether any of the other nations’ leaders will be willing to follow him.

Some White House efforts to play down summit expectations are merely the public relations game that administrations routinely play before a major international session so that whatever agreements are struck will appear grander. But the weakness of the leaders heading for Tokyo is real.

France’s President Francois Mitterrand barely has a party anymore, and his prime minister--who heads the opposition party--refused to accompany him to Tokyo. Italy’s new prime minister, Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, is personally popular but heads a political system in which many leading members have either been indicted or are under investigation.

Germany’s Chancellor Helmut Kohl finds himself surrounded by disasters, from the murders of immigrants to the still sick economy of the former East Germany, and his poll ratings have dropped to historic lows. Britain’s Prime Minister John Major did not fare well in the last elections in his nation, and his popularity has fallen further since. Even Canada’s Prime Minister Kim Campbell, who just took office, has weak support.

Clinton “is the toast of the world at 36%,” White House officials joke in a reference to the President’s poll standings.

Agreements on trade or economic policy issues almost inevitably involve sacrifices by domestic constituencies. For example, an agreement on the multilateral talks on world trade--the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)--almost certainly would require European farmers to lose some of their large subsidies, while American textile companies and their workers would have to give up some of their protections.

Weak governments seldom agree to risk that pain. “Weak leaders are great to deal with if you’re strong,” said one Administration official, “but if leaders get too weak, if they fall below a certain threshold, it is very difficult for them to do anything other than continue the status quo.”

Because of that, the Administration has given up on obtaining any major trade agreements from Japan until after the Japanese elections later this month. On GATT, Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen said Thursday that the Administration hopes to see “some headway” but warned against expecting “any major breakthrough.”

On aid to Russia, Administration officials have been scrambling to gain agreement for a $2-billion package--half the amount that Clinton pledged at his Vancouver meeting with Russian President Boris N. Yeltsin in April.

Clinton had proposed that the G-7 nations put up $2 billion in direct aid to be matched by $2 billion from international lending institutions. Now, aides said, they hope to get $500 million in direct aid, $1 billion from the international banks and $500 million more in export credits.

The problems on the economic front have increased the pressure on Clinton and his advisers to show results elsewhere.

Administration officials said Clinton hopes to sketch some of his ideas about America’s future role in Asian economic and security affairs in speeches in Tokyo and Seoul.

The Tokyo speech reportedly will focus on economics. The United States has been trying to stress its commitment to free trade across the Pacific and, in particular, to head off the threat of some form of intra-Asian trade bloc that includes Japan but excludes America.

But even as Clinton prepared to leave town, Administration officials were continuing to argue about how much of the speech should focus on the international economy and how much on domestic economic questions. Some White House aides were pushing for a talk aimed primarily at building support at home for the President’s budget proposals; another group wants Clinton to address the Japanese and urge them to put a higher priority on improving their own living standards--a step many American economists believe would greatly increase U.S. exports to Japan.

In the South Korea speech, Clinton will reaffirm America’s commitment to maintaining its troop presence in Asia, even amid defense cutbacks in the United States and Europe.

So far, the only description of the Administration’s Asia policy was sketched by Assistant Secretary of State Winston Lord at his confirmation hearing last March. He set down American policies toward specific countries and spoke vaguely of the need to create “a new Pacific community.” But he provided few details about who should belong to this community and what economic or security organizations Asia should have.

Clinton and his aides made early attempts to work out a Japan policy that would put greater, short-term emphasis on settling economic disputes between Washington and Tokyo than on preserving their security ties. After an icy meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Miyazawa in Washington last April, Clinton demanded a major “re-balancing” of the economic and trade imbalances between the two countries.

Nevertheless, the Administration’s efforts so far have produced no results. Clinton and Miyazawa agreed last April to work out by the time of the Tokyo summit a “framework” on how to resolve the economic disputes between the two countries. But negotiations on even this broke down.

The Administration sent a delegation to Tokyo 10 days ago but failed to break the jam. Afterward, U.S. officials said the breakup of Japan’s ruling party and the continuing political uncertainty in Tokyo made it unlikely that such an agreement will be reached.

Indeed, some of Clinton’s top aides admit they are having trouble figuring out what is happening in Japan, much less coming up with a policy to deal with the changes.

Asked last week whether policy decisions in Tokyo are being made by government bureaucrats or by elected politicians, a senior Administration official replied: “I’ll be honest with you, I don’t think anybody here (in Washington) knows. This is not just a normal change of governments in Japan. There’s obviously something else going on.”

Now, with Miyazawa already seemingly on his way out, American officials are playing down the importance of Clinton’s scheduled meeting with the Japanese leader.

Amid the upheaval in Tokyo, Administration officials now seem to be valuing the economic summit as much for what they will see as for what they will accomplish. They sometimes put themselves in the role of observers, rather than actors. “It is an interesting time to be in Tokyo,” said one senior Administration official. “It obviously complicates the process, but it is truly fascinating.”