I think it's early to assume that these were spies. I am sure that is one of the narratives about this, though.

I’d say calling them ‘spies’ may be unwarranted, particularly when it appears—from the context of the article–this was more about trying to cement the importance of paying close attention when disclosing your funding sources.

Those who the investigation found had disclosed their funding sources were from other countries didn’t seem to be impacted.