But, he said, 'there is no evidence of the political will necessary to make this happen ... in particular from the stronger countries, all of whom will lose out massively should the euro zone eventually collapse'.
I found this paragraph hard to understand. Could you help me analyse it grammatically? Especially the bold lines.
"should noun verb" is essentially the same as "if noun verbs". So in this case, "should the euro zone eventually collapse" means "if the euro zone eventually collapses."
This is a use of should as a modal to form the subjunctive, and you do not conjugate the main verb, which is why it's collapse and not collapses.
The part about "in particular from the stronger countries" is the speaker saying that the political will is lacking particularly from the stronger countries. I don't think it's a very well-crafted sentence, but the speaker might have been speaking "off the cuff", instead of from prepared notes.
This is the (rather literary) use of inversion for a conditional clause.
Should the euro zone eventually collapse is exactly the same as if the euro zone should eventually collapse.
Other examples:
Had I seen him -> If I had seen him
Were it to happen -> If it were to happen
It is only available with a modal or had, and as stangdon's answer suggests, the modal can usually be omitted from the uninverted form with if. (If it happened)
In modern writing I think you'll find it only with had, were, and should. In older writing you might find other modals.
