TRADE WAR WOULD NOT BE GOOD FOR U.S. OR JAPAN

After months of waffling on issue after issue, President Bill Clinton finally decided to play hard ball. He has taken a stand against Japan and is teetering on the brink of an international trade war.

While we have to marvel at this change of pace, we must seriously question the target. Morihiro Hosokawa is the first prime minister in recent history to get serious about reforming Japan's economic system. While the U.S. economy is recovering, Japan's has been faltering. The Japanese stock market is falling and the yen is rising -- deepening Japan's recession. As such, Hosokawa's political backing at home has been shaky.

America should be giving Hosokawa the support he needs to implement much-needed reforms. An improved Japanese economy would no doubt spill over into increased imports. Clinton's ill-timed ultimatums could come back to bite us with a vengeance.

When the Hosokawa and Clinton met in Washington Feb. 11, they agreed to disagree. They called for reflection, not recrimination. Clinton was quick to stress the impasse would not tarnish the "deep, rich relationship" the countries enjoyed on other issues. That reflection was certainly short-lived. Now the rhetorical fur is flying, with the U.S. promising to hand down sanctions in the near future.

That's not to say Japan doesn't deserve some of this fingerpointing. When a single country's global surplus totals $132 billion, it certainly reflects policies that are less than open to imports, as Clinton charges.

But the U.S. should not posture about the importance of free trade, and then work to push quantitative targets for another nation's imports. We would hardly accept similar demands of managed trade.

We must push to lower trade barriers, but whatever happened to free enterprise? How can we demand that Japan buy certain levels of imports -- especially products that have not been adapted to Japanese markets? How many cars with steering wheels on the wrong side can we expect them to buy? Notice that those companies that have worked to adapt to Japanese markets -- such as Coca-Cola -- have done well. Maybe we would do better to push American products that aren't readily available in Japan -- instead of force feeding goods and services they may not need or want.

Autos and auto parts make up about 60 percent of a $60 billion U.S. bilateral deficit with Japan. U.S. Trade Representative Mickey Kantor says the U.S. share of the Japanese auto market is 0.4 percent, while the Japanese control more than 20 percent of our market. But you can't count out consumer tastes from this equation. Many Americans choose to buy Japanese cars -- even if they are more expensive -- and they probably wouldn't appreciate being told otherwise.

This current dispute over Motorola and a 1989 agreement to open the cellular telephone market shows how quickly things can escalate. Two weeks ago, we were "reflecting." Now, Clinton has countered Japanese resistance with a threat to impose tariffs on several hundred million dollars of Japanese products -- the approximate potential sales Motorola could have had in Japan. Ironically, Hosokawa's popularity has climbed during this standoff. This could lead to further Japanese resistance.

A tit-for-tat scenario could ultimately lower Japanese-American trade, leaving both countries worse off. We must look beyond the numbers and return to the bargaining table. Japanese surpluses are unacceptable, but they have been declining as a percentage of overall economic activity.

Japan bashing seems a common enough diversion these days in the Clinton administration. Well we're not ready to jump on that bandwagon. The Japanese can be powerful allies, and equally aggressive adversaries. As we push for peace on other people's battlefields, are we ready to launch our own trade war? The United States should not throw in the towel quite yet. We feel more can be done through negotiation than ultimatums.

Japanese leadership admires strength. So bring that strength to the table. There's a difference between strength and aggression. We need to build economic solidarity -- not distrust -- between our two economic superpowers.