WHEN Kofi Annan, in his final speech as UN secretary general, called on the United States to work with other nations rather than act unilaterally, he was clearly taking a swipe at the Bush administration.

Ironically, it came as President Bush - in the wake of a humbling backlash from American voters - was going out of his way to show that he is not acting alone in seeking "a new way" out of the Iraq debacle.

Over three days of intensive consultations with military and diplomatic experts, he must demonstrate that he has listened to the widespread disapproval over the lack of progress in Iraq.

And whatever course the US decides to take at the end of those talks, it will be inexorably linked to the way history will judge Tony Blair's Government as President Bush's chief ally in the invasion.

It remains our view that there can be no withdrawal of troops until the mess that we helped create has been satisfactorily cleared up. Regrettably, that remains some way off.

But in the meantime, we are dismayed at the emergence of further evidence that British soldiers are ill-equipped to do the job they have been sent to do.

An inquest yesterday heard that North-East serviceman Anthony Wakefield might have survived a bomb blast if he had been wearing better body armour.

It is a scandal that he wasn't, and the Ministry of Defence needs to take urgent measures to ensure that our troops are properly protected.

Their job is terrifying enough without asking them to operate in a war zone with sub-standard kit.