I also heard that the average male only has access to about 10 condoms a year.
I can see both sides of the issue--if there is honestly such a decreased risk, then despite philosophical ideologies, circumcision should be available in areas where HIV and AIDS are simply out of control. But only if it is made free, available to all, and done in a safe, clean environment. If instruments are not properly cleaned, for example, then it will be more likely to spread blood borne diseases than decrease them.
It also needs to be done in conjunction with intense education regarding safe sexual practices and with greater availability of condoms.
Honestly, if I lived in an area where HIV/AIDS rates were 25%or greater, I would also probably opt to have my son circumsized (though not as an infant); anything to prevent infection. I can understand the desire to do anything possible to prevent one's child from suffering like that. I only hope that if they *do* start recommending routine circumcision, it is done safely, and with full disclosure of the fact that it only decreases one's risk, not eliminates it.