PARIS: Barack Obama was widely hailed yesterday for moving to restore America’s “moral authority” by ordering a halt to torture and the closure of Guantanamo prison, but only a few countries have shown any interest in taking its inmates.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay called the decisions “extremely encouraging” while the Czech presidency of the European Union (EU) praised the move to close Guantanamo as “symbolic and practical.”

Amnesty International chief Irene Khan said Obama’s order was “an important step in the right direction” and would be “closing a dark chapter” in US history. Human Rights Watch (HRW) said Obama had taken a major step toward restoring America’s moral authority around the world. But Obama’s signing of the Guantanamo closure order on Thursday, his second day in office, also raised awkward questions about what to do with over 245 inmates still behind bars.

His administration is already having to fend off an immediate demand by Beijing that 17 Chinese prisoners be handed over. Beijing said the inmates were part of a terror group seeking an independent homeland in the northwest of the country.

“They should be handed over to China, which will handle the case according to the law,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu told reporters.

An Obama administration official played down any prospect of the group of ethnic Uighurs, who hail from Xinjiang province, being returned home amid fears that they would be ill-treated.

While France, Portugal and Switzerland have indicated that they would be willing to take in some of the prisoners, other European countries were decidedly cool to the idea.

Asked if Vienna could welcome prisoners, Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger told national radio Oe1: “In my opinion the answer is a clear no.

“Whoever causes a problem should also solve it. If they’re innocent citizens, there’s no reason they shouldn’t be given a future in the United States.”

Ulrich Wilhelm, spokesman for German Chancellor Angela Merkel, said Berlin would wait to see whether the members of the European Union received a request from Washington to accept freed prisoners and if so, would seek a common EU stance.

“If they do make such a request, we Europeans will have to decide how we will react and which states might contribute. But for now, it is too early to conduct this debate,” he told a regular government news conference.

Signing the orders in the opening days of his administration was a sign that Obama wanted to make a “clean break with Bush policy” and was trying to “secure diplomatic good will abroad,” said Matthew Waxman of Columbia Law School in New York.

“He’ll need that good will to close Guantanamo because our allies will need to shoulder some responsibility,” he said.

Julia Hall, senior counterterrorism counsel at HRW, said it was vital that Europe responded to Obama’s move by taking in prisoners who would face persecution back in their homeland.

“Offering safe haven to some of the most vulnerable detainees would be a significant humanitarian gesture,” she said.

“Europe could help the new administration shut down the unlawful detention facility, a major goal, and be a force in re-establishing the rule of law.”

Under the terms of the closure order signed by Obama, it will still take a year before all the prisoners are finally released.

The two other executive orders called for a high-level task force to determine if prisoners still held at Guantanamo should be released, tried or transferred.

It also revoked an executive order passed by Bush in 2007, loosening Washington’s obligations to protect and humanely treat prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions.