It'll be pretty interesting to see how Obama is viewed 30 years from now. I can see a lot of people crediting him for the "fall of the petro-dictators," much as Reagan gets all the credit for the fall of the Soviet empire among many now.
Both are vast, vast overstatements, of course. But there is the kernel of truth that Reagan's massive defense spending sunk the final nail in the coffin.
Similarly, I do think that having a president like Obama has made a symbolic difference in the middle east. It's been a lot harder for dictators to point at him (and we the voters who elected him) like they have in the past and say, "It's all the Western devils' fault." His very name flies in the face of everything they've said for decades. That alone may be worth a peace prize. (Those on the right might rightly criticize it as the ultimate affirmative action award--winning because of his race and heritage, not what he's actually done. And they're probably right. But whatever. It's an award for impact, not effort.)
Anyway, I'd say it's a little early to make grand pronouncements about Obama's efforts in Libya. Especially after things went so surprisingly well in Egypt and Tunisia so recently, despite so much critical hand wringing by Obama detractors.
I'm dubious about this, but I reserved judgement on Bush's invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan for the first year or so. I figure I should give Obama a few months at least.
