JAPANESE TARIFFS SEEN AS WORLDWIDE WARNING
  The tough trade sanctions President
  Reagan imposed on Japanese exports are not only a shot across
  Japan's bow but also a sign Reagan will attack unfair trade
  practices worldwide, U.S. officials said.
      But Robert Crandall, a trade specialist at Brookings
  Institution, a think tank, said "a shot across their bow can
  often result in a shot in our stern."
      He said it left the United States open to retaliation.
      The U.S. officials said the 100 pct tariffs Reagan ordered
  on 300 mln dlrs worth of Japanese goods will also show Congress
  that a tough pro-trade stand can be taken under existing laws,
  and no new protectionist legislation is needed.
      In the past year tough trade action had been taken against
  the European Community over corn and sorghum, Taiwan over beer
  and wine, South Korea over counterfeiting of copyrights,
  patents and trademarkets and Japan on tobacco.
      White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater told reporters the
  tariffs - up from five pct - should be seen as a "serious signal"
  to other nations on the need for fair trade practices.
      Reagan said he imposed the sanctions on certain computers,
  television sets and some hand tools because Japan did not honor
  an agreement to end dumping semiconductors in world markets at
  less than cost and to open its markets to U.S. products. The
  tariffs were placed on items which were available from other
  sources so there would be little effect on the American
  consumer, Fitzwater said.
      Reagan has come under heavy pressure to take tougher action
  - especially against Japan - to end global unfair trade
  practices and reverse the growing U.S. trade deficit.
      The alternative was that if he did not, Congress would.
      The U.S. trade gap last year was a record 169.8 billion
  dlrs, and continues to rise, with Japan accounting for about
  one-third of America's overall deficit.
      But there are other two-way deficits - with Canada, West
  Germany, Taiwan and South Korea - and Reagan officials said the
  president is ready to fight them all.
      Reagan said in announcing the sanctions today that "I regret
  that these actions are necessary," but that the health and
  vitality of the U.S. semiconductor industry was essential to
  American competitiveness in world markets.
      "We cannot allow it to be jeopardized by unfair trading
  practices," Reagan added in the statement from his California
  vacation home at Santa Barbara.
      He said the tariffs would remain in force until Japan
  abided by the agreement.
      U.S. officials say the action today will show Congress -
  which is about to write a trade bill he does not like - that he
  already has the tools needed to fight unfair trade.
      The White House aide said of the tariff action, "it wasn't
  done to appease Congress, but because there was an unfair trade
  practice."
      The aide added, however, "on another plane, it was an
  example of how the administration uses the trade law to fight
  unfair practices, an that it is not necessary to make a major
  overall of our trade laws."
      But the analyst, Crandall, said the tariff action was not
  in the best interests of the United States, and that
  negotiations should have been pursued to resolve the issue.
      "It's very dangerous to go down the retaliatory route," he
  said, "because it leads to more retaliation and restrictions in
  trade."
      Crandall said, "the administration is doing this for its
  political impact across the country, and therefore its impact
  on Congress."
      He said, "I don't think it makes a lot of sense."
      But other analysts said it made little difference whether
  the tariffs were aimed at U.S. trading partners or Congress,
  and that the main point was that the trading partners were on
  notice that retaliation was a weapon Reagan was ready to use.
      Spokesman Fitzwater said "we don't want a trade war," but the
  imposition of sanctions showed the United States would act when
  it had evidence that trade pacts were being violated.
      Crandall said, "the administration is doing this for its
  political impact across the country, and therefore its impact
  on Congress."
      He said, "I don't think it makes a lot of sense."
      But other analysts said it made little difference whether
  the tariffs were aimed at U.S. trading partners or Congress,
  and that the main point was that the trading partners were on
  notice that retaliation was a weapon Reagan was ready to use.
      Spokesman Fitzwater said "we don't want a trade war," but the
  imposition of sanctions showed the United States would act when
  it had evidence that trade pacts were being violated.
  

