Can you give a link to what you're referencing? Is it more current than this?
edit - I found it, but I don't see where they address many of the points below that were included in their earlier bulletin.
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/84/7/news10706/en/
"There are other concerns about circumcision. During the healing period, sexually active men are likely to be at higher risk of HIV infection. During this time — approximately three to four weeks — men should be instructed to refrain from sexual activity. There are opponents of male circumcision who see it as a violation of human rights, particularly if carried out on children or adolescents. But perhaps the largest potential problem with circumcision is the false perception of security. Male circumcision is not a magic bullet and does not provide full protection. If men perceive they are fully protected then it could lead to a decrease in condom use or an increase in risky sexual behaiour. This was seen in the Orange Farm study when the intervention groups had significantly more sexual contacts. Dr Venter says: “There is a danger that men will see circumcision as an invisible condom and take part in more risky sexual behaviour. However, it would be the same with an HIV vaccine. The message has just got to be put across carefully that circumcision is part of the jigsaw puzzle of prevention.” Male circumcision needs to be promoted as part of the range of methods to reduce the risk of HIV, including avoidance of unprotected penetrative sex, reduction in the number of sexual partners and consistent condom use."
Pretty much echoes the same concerns that were brought up in an earlier thread on this subject. While no doubt helpful in areas of the world where HIV is rampant it's a poor second to aggressive education in condom use and safe sex behavior.