It seems to me the title is deceptive. The article reads, to my eyes, something like this. "I make arguments that an Italian bank run could NOT crack the euro. Then in the end, I say, that's theory. In practice I am worried. Also, if a country's banks cannot make crossborder deposits, then that country is de facto out of the monetary union. See Greece." So the article's line is two-pronged: one, at least in theory, the euro as the common currency of many countries is probably not at risk from an Italian bank run. Two, Italy, however, is at risk of not receiving the benefits of the euro if bank runs materialize. I think both points are right, but far less melodramatic than the title implies. Also, sort of more consensual. Am I reading this wrong?