The United Nations has joined Zimbabwe’s power-sharing government in appealing for more than $700 million in humanitarian aid for the ruined country.

But while Western countries may show willing when it comes to emergency aid, they are still reluctant to give money to the government between President Robert Mugabe and Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, his old rival.

First, they say, there must be broader political reforms and a clearer demonstration of respect for human rights.

The Western countries have long been at odds with Mugabe, accusing him of ruining Zimbabwe after the seizure of white-owned farms, of widespread human rights abuses and of making a mockery of elections last year that were widely condemned outside Zimbabwe.

But if those countries don’t come up with the finance that the government needs, some believe there is a danger it could undermine prospects for change rather than strengthening them.

"My advice is for the international community to engage Zimbabwe as the opposite of this will only benefit hardliners," Tsvangirai told a visiting French minister last week.

The unity government has said it won more than $1 billion in promised credit lines from African banks for private firms, but says it needs more than $8 billion for reconstruction.

Should Western countries aid the government now, or is it too soon?

You can have your say on the survey below. Your comments are welcome too.

President Robert Mugabe joined the mourning for Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai's wife on Tuesday and called on Zimbabweans to end violence and support his old rival to help rebuild the country.

The death of Susan Tsvangirai in a road crash in which her husband was also injured has, at least on the surface, brought about a show of unity between Zimbabwe’s bitterest foes that might never have looked possible.

"This is a difficult moment for our colleague. He has lost a partner and we must all rally to support him and lessen his burden,” Mugabe told mourners at the service for the woman who supported Tsvangirai through years of political struggle against him.

"To our supporters, we want to say violence should stop. That's what (Mrs) Tsvangirai would have wanted, for us to co-exist peacefully. We have just started a new life after years of fighting each other and insulting each other. We have said let's give peace and harmony a chance and work together."

Many Zimbabweans were suspicious of the cause of Friday’s crash, the month after Mugabe and Tsvangirai had formed a unity government that has been mired in disagreements over appointments, economic policy and the detention of activists and supporters of long time opposition leader Tsvangirai.

Tsvangirai himself, however, has ruled out foul play in the car crash - putting it down to an accident on one of Zimbabwe’s dangerously potholed roads.

Tsvangirai's oldest son Edwin thanked Mugabe for his speech.

"I want to thank His Excellency the president for words that changed my understanding of him," he told the crowd.

Has the picture in Zimbabwe now changed? Will Mugabe and Tsvangirai be able to work together to pull the country out of crisis?

Zimbabwe's opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai became the new prime minister on Wednesday, sworn in by President Robert Mugabe -- his old political rival.

Tsvangirai vowed to rescue the stricken economy and called on the international community to help salvage the economy of Zimbabwe where unemployment is above 90 percent, prices double every day and half the 12 million population need food aid.

The new unity government will also have to grapple with a cholera epidemic that has killed nearly 3,500 people, the worst outbreak of the disease in Africa in 15 years. Millions of Zimbabweans who fled the country will be cautious about coming back until they see results.

Foreign investors and Western donors have made it clear money will come only when a new democratic government is formed and bold economic reforms are taken - such as reversing nationalisation policies.

What are the prospects for the unity government given the historic animosity between Mugabe and Tsvangirai, the shear scale of Zimbabwe's economic collapse and the ongoing detention of opposition activists?

Despite the extremely tight security at this week's African Union summit in Ethiopia, one brief lapse gave some journalists covering the meeting a very rare glimpse behind the scenes.

Reporters at the annual meeting in Addis Ababa are normally kept well away from the heads of state, except for the occasional carefully managed press conference, or a brief word thrown in our direction as they sweep past in the middle of a phalanx of sharp-elbowed, scowling bodyguards.

As the talks dragged well past midnight on Tuesday, long after the summit was scheduled to end, a European diplomat approached me and a colleague: "Want to see something interesting?"

Leading us down an outside staircase, we were suddenly confronted with the sight of dozens of African leaders consulting in private.

The curtains in the meeting room had been left open a little, and we had a perfect view of Libya's Muammar Gaddafi holding forth. Gaddafi, who was elected AU chairman at the summit, appeared to be particularly animated -- although we couldn't hear what he was saying.

But as the discussions neared 2 a.m., the other presidents became visibly more and more tired.

Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe, sitting just a couple of metres away, looked particularly dejected, often holding his head in his hands. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni stared stonily ahead. AU Commission chairman Jean Ping, sitting next to Gaddafi, stifled a few yawns.

But still Gaddafi, who is urging the leaders to agree to his long-held dream of a United States of Africa, pushed on.

I ran to tell colleagues and soon a couple of photographers were snapping away through the glass. It was bright inside, and pitch black outside, so the presidents couldn't see us.

"Nobody use flash: security will be here in a split second if they see it," one Kenyan cameraman warned.

And still the talks went on.

Several leaders kept checking their watches, and others began surreptitiously packing their attaché cases, perhaps in the hope of heading back to their hotels to sleep or to enjoy the last few hours of Addis Ababa nightlife.

Then an aide brought the gold-robed Gaddafi another steaming pot of tea.

Would anybody be able to leave before dawn?

Moments later, Museveni decided to act.

Leaving his seat, he walked the length of the hall and whispered something in the Libyan leader's ear. Gaddafi looked up at him, laughed, and moments later the meeting broke up.

We quit our unprecedented vantage point on the stairs and raced with scores of other journalists, bodyguards and officials to the entrance to the hall. Maybe we would get the press conference we'd been waiting for after all.

But no such luck.

A large posse of burly bodyguards suddenly swept past, Gaddafi at its centre. He was going back to his tent, set up in the gardens of a palatial hotel.

"Go home and sleep," he told the throngs of reporters thrusting microphones at him and hurling questions. "Come back tomorrow."

Zimbabwe's opposition Movement for Democratic Change has agreed to join a unity government with President Robert Mugabe, breaking a crippling deadlock four months after the political rivals reached a power-sharing deal.

The decision could improve Zimbabwe's prospects of recovering from economic collapse and easing a humanitarian crisis in which more than 60,000 people have been infected by cholera and more than half the population needs food aid.

Zimbabweans have long wished for a new leadership that can ease the world's highest inflation rate and severe food, fuel and foreign currency shortages. Millions have fled the suffering to neighbouring countries, straining regional economies.

Western aid and financial assistance tied to the creation of a democratic government and economic reform could be crucial to rescuing what was once one of Africa's most promising countries.

South Africa's President Kgalema Motlanthe was optimistic and told Reuters in Davos that his country would help rebuild Zimbabwe.

But Senegal's President Abdoulaye Wade and Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga cast doubt on whether the deal would work and said President Mugabe must go.

Will this decision work? Will it bring change and help ease the suffering of ordinary Zimbabweans? What do you think?

Southern African leaders have decided at a summit that Zimbabwe should form a unity government next month but the opposition said it was disappointed with the outcome, raising doubts over chances for ending the crisis.

The 15-nation SADC grouping said after the meeting in South Africa - its fifth attempt to secure a deal on forming a unity government - it had agreed that opposition MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai should be sworn in as prime minister by Feb. 11.

All parties agreed control of the hotly disputed Home Affairs Ministry, which has been a major obstacle to a final agreement, should be divided between President Robert Mugabe’s ZANU-PF party and Tsvangirai’s MDC for six months, said South African President Kgalema Motlanthe.

But the MDC quickly issued a statement after the SADC communique was read out, making clear its disappointment and raising the possibility that deadlock would drag on as Zimbabweans face growing economic hardship. The MDC said its national council would meet this weekend to define its position on the summit.

SADC said ministers would be sworn in on Feb. 13, which would “conclude the process of the formation of the inclusive government”. Allocation of ministries would be reviewed six months after the inauguration of the government, it added.

Mugabe, in power since 1980, and his ZANU-PF party have urged the opposition to join a unity government but say they will not hesitate to form one without them.

As the dispute drags on, prices are doubling every day. Food and fuel are in short supply and the local currency has been rendered virtually worthless. The death toll from a cholera epidemic has neared 2,900.

Should Tsvangirai now do as the southern African leaders say even if he has not got what he wanted? Should Mugabe go it alone to form a government if the opposition does not join now? What do you think?

Fifteen years ago this month, Guinea’s late ruler Lansana Conte made clear what form democracy would take under his rule.

We answered a summons to a late night news conference to hear the result of his first multiparty election, speeding through silent streets where armoured vehicles waited in the shadows. The interior minister announced that ballots from the east, the opposition’s stronghold, had been cancelled because of irregularities. Conte had therefore won 50.93 percent of the vote. There was no need for a run-off because he had an absolute majority.

The show was over.

We rushed off to file our stories at the press centre, set up helpfully by a government under pressure to show the world it was ready for fair elections. The press centre was gone, the lines cut. In the morning, fighter jets swept over Conakry in case the message had not been clear already.

There were more elections, there was occasional turmoil on the streets, sometimes bloodshed. At one point Conte was almost overthrown, but he managed to hold on until his death from illness on Monday.

In a matter of hours, the army - Conte’s real constituency – made clear he would be succeeded by one of his own instead of any of the civilian politicians who prospered under the system over which he kept such strong control.

Captain Moussa Dadis Camara, the head of the junta, was the first soldier to announce the coup on state radio. A Guinean website said the choice was made by drawing lots. Camara’s promises - heard many before times in Africa - are to fight corruption, to hold elections in a set period – in this case two years - and not to stand himself.

Thousands of Guineans have come out to cheer, hoping for a clean break from the Conte era. But thousands once cheered Conte as a reformer. His 1984 coup followed the death of Sekou Toure, the independence era leader who became paranoid, cruel and isolated during more than a quarter century in power.

It is interesting to compare Guinea and Ghana, the first former European colonies in West Africa to win independence - Ghana in 1957 and Guinea in 1958.

In recent years, Ghana seems to have escaped its own cycle of coups and counter coups that brought ruin for decades. On Sunday, it will hold a presidential election run-off after a first round that set an example to the continent. The two candidates both appear to have a genuine chance of winning. Investment has been flowing in and living standards have, overall, been rising.

Look at the World Bank data and the winner is very clear. In the decade between 1997 and 2007, Guinea’s per capita income, in current U.S. dollars, dropped from $500 to $400. Ghana’s has risen from $370 to $590.

Will Guinea have a better chance of success this time? Is Western-style democracy appropriate in a country carved up by colonialists across ethnic lines? Is there a better alternative?

What should the world do? Western countries were never particularly vocal about Conte’s version of democracy. Will they be as critical of the junta as they have been of Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe, or do different standards apply?

It was not hard to see which of Zimbabwe’s rivals felt he had come out on top from the regional summit at the weekend.

President Robert Mugabe described the leaders as “persuasive”. Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai said he was “shocked and saddened”.

Leaders of the Southern African Development Community demanded immediate implementation of Zimbabwe’s power-sharing deal and said the rivals should share the powerful Home Affairs ministry to end weeks of deadlock – a proposal quickly rejected by Tsvangirai.

Anyone hoping the summit might be able to bring Zimbabwe’s increasingly desperate crisis closer to a resolution would have been disappointed.

Instead of highlighting a strong position, it showed up more than anything why the region’s leaders are unlikely to ever be able to force Zimbabwe’s rivals to implement a power-sharing deal that now looks in growing doubt.

What chance is there now for the power-sharing deal? Should Tsvangirai accept the verdict of the regional leaders and share the Home Affairs post? Should Mugabe form a government alone if Tsvangirai does not go along?

What do you think?

Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe has sworn in two vice-presidents ahead of talks on power-sharing. He has also allocated important ministries to his ZANU-PF parties.

It’s a familiar pattern.

Mugabe imposes his will and MorganTsvangirai’s opposition cries foul.

Will former South African President Thabo Mbeki be able to mediate a breakthrough? After being ousted as president by his ANC party, he might not be so confident to be seen walking hand in hand with Mugabe at the airport as he has in the past.

As every twist and turn in the talks is analysed, the word endangered is increasingly used. Endangered talks.

But what about ordinary Zimbabweans? They seem more endangered every time the formation of a cabinet is delayed by accusations flying from one side to another.

Will inflational jump to astronomical levels again? Yes. Will food shortages worsen, probably.  Will Zimbabweans see their country on its feet again? It is not likely to be soon.

The words of Western leaders have long been ineffective and in any case, they have their own financial collapse to worry about right now. African countries appear no more inclined to take action than before.

In the meantime, it seems Mugabe is directing the show again.

How long can this go on?

South African President Thabo Mbeki did not get to bask long in the success of securing Zimbabwe’s power-sharing deal before finding himself in the firing line again at home.

Now his most strident foes - who can be found within his ruling African National Congress - say he should be pushed from office after a judge made clear he saw political interference in the corruption trial against ANC leader and longstanding Mbeki rival Jacob Zuma.

The plan by prosecutors to challenge the court’s decision to throw out the trial looks set to further stoke political tensions. The ANC executive committee is due to meet this weekend.

Zuma has said the ANC should stay united ahead of the election in April, when Mbeki has to step down anyway, and was quoted as saying that wasting energy on trying to force the president out sooner was like “beating a dead snake”.

South Africa’s economy has grown steadily with Mbeki in power, although that growth is slowing now, but the president’s critics say only the rich have benefited and accuse him of failures over everything from power shortages to xenophobic attacks to crime to AIDS.

Until recently, Mbeki’s soft diplomatic tack on Zimbabwe had been branded a failure by many too.

Has Mbeki had a fair hearing? What will his legacy be as the man who followed Nelson Mandela to the presidency? Should he go sooner rather than later?

What do you think?