To many people, the question rising from President Barack Obama's receiving the Nobel Peace Prize yesterday was very straightforward.

Who says so?

In all the years that the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded -- 90 times since it was first bestowed in 1901 -- it might never have sparked as much debate.

Alfred Nobel, a Swedish arms manufacturer and the inventor of dynamite, stipulated in his 1895 will that much of his vast fortune be used to establish five prizes, one of which was to go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses."

Unlike the other Nobel Prizes, which are awarded by Swedish institutions, he said the peace prize should be given out by a five-member committee elected by the Norwegian Parliament.

Today, those committee members (and the years in which they were appointed) are: Committee Chairman Thorbjoern Jagland (2009); Sissel Roenbeck (1994); Aagot Valle (2009); Kaci Kullman Five (2003); and Inger-Marie Ytterhorn (2000).

Yesterday, as critics assailed the selection of Mr. Obama as "premature" and "inappropriate," the politics of that five-member group came under scrutiny.

The members are appointed by the left-leaning Norwegian Parliament, and Mr. Jagland, Ms. Roenbeck and Ms. Valle have backgrounds in Norway's political left. Ms. Five and Ms. Ytterhorn, however, are from the right.

But to many, these five Norwegians are on the same page, with a clear idea of what they want from the leader of the United States of America, and they have used the peace prize to reinforce that image. That, critics say, taints the committee's credibility.

Comments from the four Nobel committee members who spoke with The Associated Press revealed that they intended to encourage, not reward. They saluted Mr. Obama for changing the tone of American diplomacy and the way the nation interacts with the rest of the world.

"He has created a new international climate," the committee said in its announcement in Oslo.

"Some people say -- and I understand it -- 'Isn't it premature? Too early?' Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now," said Mr. Jagland, a former prime minister of Norway. "It is now that we have the opportunity to respond -- all of us."

Mr. Jagland said the committee considered a record pool of 205 nominations and had "several candidates until the last minute," but it became more obvious that "we couldn't get around these deep changes that are taking place" under Mr. Obama.

"The question we have to ask is who has done the most in the previous year to enhance peace in the world," Mr. Jagland said. "And who has done more than Barack Obama?"

Mr. Jagland pointed to the 1971 prize to West German Chancellor Willy Brandt and the 1990 prize to Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev as two examples of the honor predating true achievement.

"One can say that Barack Obama is trying to change the world, just as those two personalities changed Europe," Mr. Jagland said. "We have to get the world on the right track again."

Ms. Valle, a lawmaker for the Socialist Left party, said she hoped the selection would be viewed as "support and a commitment for Obama."

"And I hope it will be an inspiration for all those that work with nuclear disarmament and disarmament," she said.

The secretive committee declined to say who nominated Mr. Obama. In Nobel tradition, nominations are kept secret for 50 years, unless those making the submissions go public about their picks. This year's nominations included Colombian activist Piedad Cordoba, Afghan woman's rights activist Sima Samar, and Denis Mukwege, a physician in war-torn Congo who opened a clinic to help rape victims.

Nominators for the prize are broad and include former winners of the prize; current and former members of the committee and their staff; members of national governments and legislatures; university professors of law, theology, social sciences, history and philosophy; leaders of peace research and foreign affairs institutes; and members of international courts of law.

This isn't the first time that the awarding of the prize has been controversial. Some point to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat receiving the honor in 1994 as one of the prize's low points; others contend that it showed the committee's open-mindedness.

A number of former world leaders have actively campaigned for the honor, only to be rebuffed. The committee, throughout its history, has had a reputation of being fiercely independent and determined to be above public pressure.

And when the committee members feel as though no one is deserving of the prize, no one gets it. Nineteen times, including spans during World War I, World War II and the late 1960s, the peace prize was not awarded.

Washington correspondent Daniel Malloy writes the "Pittsburgh On The Potomac" blog exclusively at PG+, a members-only web site of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.