Spying in the Bible 8 - 1442 BC

Moses' Disaster as Spymaster (2)

The fourth step in the intelligence cycle is supposed to be Analysis and Production, where the raw intelligence is given to analysts to integrate and interpret all known information, make connections, find patterns, establish significance, and finally make assessments and conclusions. This analysis is supposed to be documented in a “finished intelligence” product, which would be given to the policy and decision makers. However, this step was not taken by the Israelites in this mission, to their great detriment.

The fifth step in the Intelligence Cycle is Dissemination and Explanation of the finished intelligence to the end user, but because there was no analysis done to create a finished intelligence product, the raw intelligence was disseminated. Worse than that, though, the report was given directly from the spies to the people, who were the end users of the intelligence and even civilians (Numbers 13:26-29).

They came back to Moses and Aaron and the whole Israelite community at Kadesh in the Desert of Paran. There they reported to them and to the whole assembly and showed them the fruit of the land. They gave Moses this account: “We went into the land to which you sent us, and it does flow with milk and honey! Here is its fruit. But the people who live there are powerful, and the cities are fortified and very large. We even saw descendants of Anak there. The Amalekites live in the Negev; the Hittites, Jebusites and Amorites live in the hill country; and the Canaanites live near the sea and along the Jordan.”

The major mistake with this report is that is was given in a public forum to the people as a whole. It should have been given to a few policy makers who decided what course of action to take based on the report. Yet, even then, the spies came back with a unanimous report of the facts, regarding the towns, number and location of the enemy, land features, and the fact that the land was "flowing with milk and honey.” The one type of information they did not bring back was the attitudes and temperaments of the people. That information was not specifically tasked, which it should have been, but professionals would have known to gather it and discuss it.

Unfortunately, the debriefing of the spies did not end there, with the dissemination of the facts, but continued with the conclusions drawn by the spies and their policy recommendations based on those conclusions (Numbers 13:30-32).

Then Caleb silenced the people before Moses and said, “We should go up and take possession of the land, for we can certainly do it.”

But the men who had gone up with him said, “We can’t attack those people; they are stronger than we are.” And they spread among the Israelites a bad report about the land they had explored. They said, “The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size. We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.”

This is the point where the mission actually failed. Spies should never have policy input (especially these spies, who were also end users and military leaders as described previously). Also, dissemination of the intelligence product should never include policy recommendations, which should be left to the policy makers. Even Caleb, whose intentions were pure in following God’s direction, should have kept his mouth shut like Joshua did. In this part of the report, instead of just sticking to the facts, the other spies exaggerated and added in guesses as to what the enemy thought of them. They could not actually know that they would seem like “grasshoppers” in the eyes of the enemy “giants”. This is also why the spies should not have been the ones disseminating the report. They are biased based on what they saw. Instead, analysts should have taken their information and presented it objectively, with as little bias as possible.

The last step in the Intelligence Cycle process is called Evaluation and Feedback, where the end users give their assessment of the product presented to them and make policy decisions based on the briefing. Many times new questions arise based on the information that was acquired, which can initiate more tasking to get more information. Also, feedback is often given on the information presented and what the end users thought of it, how useful it was, and the like. The Israelites populous did give the spies evaluation and feedback on this mission (Numbers 14:1-2,6-7,10).

That night all the members of the community raised their voices and wept aloud. All the Israelites grumbled against Moses and Aaron, and the whole assembly said to them, “If only we had died in Egypt! Or in this wilderness!...

Joshua son of Nun and Caleb son of Jephunneh, who were among those who had explored the land, tore their clothes and said to the entire Israelite assembly, “The land we passed through and explored is exceedingly good. But the whole assembly talked about stoning them.

The evaluation given of the intelligence was that it would have been better if the whole Hebrew people were already dead and the feedback to the spies who tried to convince them otherwise was that they should be stoned to death. The people took this position based on the personal views of the influential leaders who had done the spying, not because of the intelligence facts, which were actually all positive. The public discussion of the operation resulted in damaging Moses' authority and led to a loss of the people's confidence in their God, their leaders, and their collective abilities. Ultimately, this overall effort consisted of a successful espionage mission, but an unsuccessful campaign.