I'll add here from the critics' perspective, i.e. of Yanis Varoufakis, who was a finance minister of Greece...
Belatedly, but correctly, they [Italy etc.] demanded a so-called “eurobond”: a common debt instrument that allows total long-term debt to shrink by transferring a portion of it from member states, which have a lot of debt, to the eurozone, which has none.
This debate is now dead in the water, killed off by the Eurogroup’s decision to rely almost entirely on new debts falling squarely on the member states’ weakened shoulders. The only concession to the nine governments suggesting debt-sharing was that the new ESM loans will have no strings attached to them. This is, alas, a red herring as the conditions will come later, once the eurozone’s fiscal rules bite again.
The message today to Italians, Spaniards and Greeks is: your government can borrow large amounts from Europe’s bailout fund. No conditions. You will also receive help to pay for unemployment benefits from countries where employment holds up better. But, within a year or two, as your economies are recovering, huge new austerity measures will be demanded to bring your government’s finances back into line, including the repayment of the monies spent on your unemployment benefits. This is equivalent to helping the fallen get up but striking them over the head as they begin to rise.
So, [even] the critics concede that there are no (explicitly onerous) conditions attached to the ESM loans now "on the table", except those that entail from the EU treaties anyway. To critics, this is (of course) no small matter, as they see the EU getting split along debt-load faults (and in their view only jointly issued debt can fix this).