Much of the confusion about the effect of Napoleon's Egyptian campaigns stem from their purpose (which was confusing) and their effect on France (which was very little). Another problem was using this invasion to assess France's policy towards the Ottoman Empire. Because Napoleon had invaded a territory of Ottoman, other European nations believed France had exchanged its policy of working with that empire for partitioning it. In fact, the "Directors" (French leaders) believed the invasion was as much in Ottoman interests as France's.
However, Napoleon's invasion was as influential on the "Eastern Question" as the treaty of Knchnk Kaynjarja of 1774. In that treaty, signed in Bulgaria, the Russo Turkish War of 1769 1774 was ended, along with undisputed Ottoman control of the Black Sea. It also provided a diplomatic basis for future Russian intervention, or interference, in Ottoman affairs. The treaty did this by guaranteeing Russia the right to represent Orthodox Christians in Moldavia and Walachia. Along with economic privileges and use of waterways, Russia then interpreted this treaty to include representation of all Christians and so entitle Russia to greater involvement in Ottoman affairs and concurrent right to dictate Ottoman actions.
Likewise, France's invasion of the Ottoman Empire brought further Euroean involvement in their affairs. A French invasion of Egypt posed a threat to England in two ways: being able to command the overland routes to India and thus disrupt supplies, and being able to foment hostility among the Indian princes. To do this would require a continued French presence in Egypt and continued French economic input accompanied by diplomatic demands.
At the beginning of the 19th century, France's principal enemy was Britain. All of France's actions, especially the military actions, must therefore be interpreted in light of that one fact. Britain itself was a sufficiently strong empire f...