>> Britain believes that the nerve agent used in the Sergei Skripal incident was of Russian origin. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the Kremlin authorized the attack. It's because in the 1990s, the scene was set for such chemical weapons to be stolen. Christian Lowe explains from the Reuters Moscow bureau.
>> At that time, there was chronic underfunding in Russia's chemical weapons sector. Lots of scientists who worked in that field hadn't been paid for months. People who visited facilities that stored chemical weapons said that physical security measures were deficient in many ways. So at a time when similar installations in the United States had all sorts of sophisticated electronic security measures.
None of that was present in the comparable Russian facilities.>> Experts at that time said that a dedicated intruder could get into these places and steal small quantities. And we know it happened, at least once.>> In 1995, a Russian businessman called Ivan Kivelidi died at work, as did his secretary, they both died of organ failure.
The authorities found that a toxic chemical substance had been applied to the telephone receiver in his office, a chemical weapon. The police established that a Russian chemical weapons scientist had taken chemical weapons out of the institute where he worked. He stored them in his garage, in vials, and this Russian scientist.
By his own admission, because we've seen a transcript of the interview he had with police, was short of money. He had debts, and he began selling chemical weapons to criminals.>> Most experts Reuters have spoken with have concluded that the Russian state. Or elements within it, likely authorized the attack in Britain.
History shows that there is at least a possibility that the Kremlin was not involved.