Volcanic activity worldwide 26 Sep 2025: Etna volcano, Santiaguito, Pacaya, Fuego, Popocatépetl, So…

Map of today's active volcanoes

Map of today’s active volcanoes

Etna (Sicily, Italy): The Instituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia-Osservatorio Etneo (INGV-Osservatorio Etneo) reported that eruptive activity decreased at Etna on 25 September 2025 (local). The aviation alert level was lowered to „Green“ (level 1 on a 4-level scale) on 25 September 2025 at 0750 by INGV due to decreased eruptive activity at the summit craters. The alert level remained at „Yellow“ (level 2 on a 4-level scale).
Source: Instituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia-Osservatorio Etneo (INGV-Osservatorio Etneo)
… [read more]

Svartsengi (Reykjanes peninsula, SW Iceland): (26 Sep) Analysis of past events provides an estimated volume range required to trigger the next dike intrusion that might turn into a new eruption. Using a geodetic model, it is possible to calculate the time needed to recharge these volumes, including associated uncertainties.
As of today, the lower threshold of 11 million m³ is expected to be reached on 27 September, and the upper threshold of 3 million m³ on 18 December, assuming current inflow rates continue. Once the lower bound is reached, the likelihood of a new diking event and eruption increases, and an eruption could occur at any time thereafter. The period from 27 September to 18 December therefore represents the medium-term forecast. This forecast will be updated as magma inflow rates change. As in previous events, a short-term forecast will be issued if the IMO real-time monitoring network detects signs of dike propagation.
In light of this assessment, the IMO has raised the alert level for Reykjanes–Svartsengi from Level 1 to Level 2.

Kusatsu-Shirane (Honshu): (25 Sep) The Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) reported that unrest activity increased at Kusatsu-Shiranesan between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Restriction on proximity to the crater“ (on a 5-level scale).
Source: Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA)
… [read more]

Suwanose-jima (Ryukyu Islands): (25 Sep) The Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) reported that the eruption continued at Suwanosejima on 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Restriction on proximity to the crater“ (on a 5-level scale).
Source: Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA)
… [read more]

Canlaon (Central Philippines): (25 Sep) The Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) reported that the eruption continued at Kanlaon on 24 September 2025 (local). Plume(s) rose to a maximum of 75 m (246 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „2 – Moderate Level of Volcanic Unrest“ (level 2 on a 0–5 level scale).
Source: Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS)
… [read more]

Taal (Luzon, Philippines): (25 Sep) The Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) reported that unrest continued at Taal on 24 September 2025 (local). Plume(s) rose to a maximum of 1,200 m (3,937 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „1 – Low-Level Unrest“ (on a 0–5 level scale).
Source: Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS)
… [read more]

Mayon (Luzon Island, Philippines): (25 Sep) The Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) reported that unrest continued at Mayon on 24 September 2025 (local). Plume(s) were reported. There were 2 seismically detected rockfalls. The alert level remained at „1 – Abnormal“ (on a 0–5 level scale).
Source: Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS)
… [read more]

Bulusan (Luzon Island, Philippines): (25 Sep) The Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) reported that unrest continued at Bulusan on 24 September 2025 (local). Plume(s) were reported. The alert level remained at „1 – Low Level of Volcanic Unrest“ (level 1 on a 0–5 level scale).
Source: Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS)
… [read more]

Telong (northern Sumatra, Indonesia): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Telong, Bur ni on 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Karangetang (Siau Island, Sangihe Islands, Indonesia): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Karangetang on 24 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 10 m (33 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Raung (East Java): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Raung on 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Gamalama (Halmahera): The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Gamalama on 25 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 20 m (66 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Slamet (Central Java, Indonesia): The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Slamet on 25 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 50 m (164 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Ibu (Halmahera, Indonesia): Volcanic Ash Advisory Center Darwin (VAAC) issued the following report: ERUPTION LAST REPORTED AT 26/1549Z EST VA DTG:26/1610Z
…25 Sep:
The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Ibu on 24 September 2025 (local). There were 111 explosions reported, with plumes rising to a maximum of 500 m (1,640 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Sinabung (Sumatra, Indonesia): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Sinabung on 24 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 300 m (984 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale). Activity also included: seismically detected flowage event(s).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Dieng (Central Java): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Dieng Volcanic Complex on 24 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 80 m (262 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Lewotobi (Flores): Explosive activity continues. Volcanic Ash Advisory Center (VAAC) Darwin warned about a volcanic ash plume that rose up to estimated 12000 ft (3700 m) altitude or flight level 120 .
The full report is as follows: VA TO FL120 REPORTED AT 26/0943Z MOV SW EST VA DTG:26/1230Z to 12000 ft (3700 m)
…25 Sep:
The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Lewotobi (Laki-Laki) on 24 September 2025 (local). Crater incandescence was observed in webcam images. There was 1 explosion reported, with plumes rising to a maximum of 400 m (1,312 ft) above the vent. There was 1 explosion reported, with plumes rising to a maximum of 500 m (1,640 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 4 – Caution“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Soputan (North Sulawesi, Indonesia): The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Soputan on 25 September 2025 (local). There were 2 seismically detected rockfalls. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Lewotolo (Lesser Sunda Islands): Explosive activity continues. Volcanic Ash Advisory Center (VAAC) Darwin warned about a volcanic ash plume that rose up to estimated 7000 ft (2100 m) altitude or flight level 070 .
The full report is as follows: VA TO FL070 REPORTED AT 26/1403Z MOV W EST VA DTG:26/2010Z to 7000 ft (2100 m)
…25 Sep:
The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Lewotolok on 24 September 2025 (local). There were 255 explosions reported, with plumes rising to a maximum of 600 m (1,969 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 3 – Standby“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Merapi (Central Java, Indonesia): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Merapi on 24 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 100 m (328 ft) above the vent. There were 6 hot rockfalls, traveling up to 2,000 m. There were 78 seismically detected rockfalls. The alert level remained at „Level 3 – Standby“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Bromo (East Java, Indonesia): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Tengger Caldera on 24 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 400 m (1,312 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Semeru (East Java, Indonesia): Volcanic Ash Advisory Center Darwin (VAAC) issued the following report: ERUPTION LAST REPORTED AT 25/1113Z EST VA DTG:26/1200Z
…25 Sep:
The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Semeru on 24 September 2025 (local). There were 74 explosions reported, with plumes rising to a maximum of 900 m (2,953 ft) above the vent. There were 5 seismically detected rockfalls. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Marapi (Western Sumatra, Indonesia): Explosive activity continues. Volcanic Ash Advisory Center (VAAC) Darwin warned about a volcanic ash plume that rose up to estimated 13000 ft (4000 m) altitude or flight level 130 .
The full report is as follows: VA TO FL130 REPORTED AT 26/1131Z MOV E EST VA DTG:26/1140Z to 13000 ft (4000 m)
…25 Sep:
The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Marapi on 24 September 2025 (local). There was 1 seismically detected explosion reported. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Dempo (Sumatra): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Dempo on 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Dukono (Halmahera): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that the eruption continued at Dukono on 24 September 2025 (local). Ash and gas plume(s) rose to a maximum of 400 m (1,312 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Ruang (Sangihe Islands, Indonesia): The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Ruang on 25 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 50 m (164 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Awu (Sulawesi & Sangihe Islands): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Awu on 24 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 10 m (33 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Kerinci (Sumatra): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Kerinci on 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Banda Api (Banda Sea): The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Banda Api on 25 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Alert“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Lokon-Empung (North Sulawesi, Indonesia): (25 Sep) The Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG) reported that unrest continued at Lokon-Empung on 24 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 25 m (82 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Level 3 – Standby“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard/Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi (CVGHM/PVMBG)
… [read more]

Kilauea (Hawai’i): (25 Sep) The United States Geological Survey – Hawaiian Volcano Observatory (USGS-HVO) reported that the eruption continued at Kilauea on 24 September 2025 (local). Gas plume(s) were reported. The alert level remained at „Watch“ (level 3 on a 4-level scale). The aviation alert level remained at „Orange“ (level 3 on a 4-level scale).
Source: United States Geological Survey – Hawaiian Volcano Observatory (USGS-HVO)
… [read more]

Shishaldin (Aleutian Islands, Alaska): (25 Sep) The United States Geological Survey – Alaska Volcano Observatory (USGS-AVO) reported that unrest continued at Shishaldin between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Advisory“ (level 2 on a 4-level scale). The aviation alert level remained at „Yellow“ (level 2 on a 4-level scale). Activity also included: SO2 degassing.
Source: United States Geological Survey – Alaska Volcano Observatory (USGS-AVO)
… [read more]

Great Sitkin (United States, Aleutian Islands): (25 Sep) The United States Geological Survey – Alaska Volcano Observatory (USGS-AVO) reported that the eruption continued at Great Sitkin between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). Lava continued to erupt in the summit crater. The alert level remained at „Watch“ (level 3 on a 4-level scale). The aviation alert level remained at „Orange“ (level 3 on a 4-level scale).
Source: United States Geological Survey – Alaska Volcano Observatory (USGS-AVO)
… [read more]

Popocatépetl (Central Mexico): (25 Sep) The Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres (CENAPRED) reported that the eruption continued at Popocatépetl between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). Ash, gas, and vapor plume(s) were reported. The alert level remained at „Yellow Alert – Phase 2“ (level 4 on a 7-level scale).
Source: Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres (CENAPRED)
… [read more]

Santiaguito (Guatemala): Volcanic Ash Advisory Center Washington (VAAC) issued the following report: PSBL LGT VA EM
…25 Sep:
The Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH) reported that the eruption continued at Santa María between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). The new lava flow, first reported on 12 September 2025, continued to advance down the S flank, reaching a length of 800 m. There were explosions reported. Ashfall was reported in Loma Linda (6 km W) and San Marcos Palajunoj (8 km SW).
Source: Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH)
… [read more]

Pacaya (Guatemala): (25 Sep) The Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH) reported that unrest continued at Pacaya between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). Gas plume(s) were reported.
Source: Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH)
… [read more]

Fuego (Guatemala): Explosive activity continues. Volcanic Ash Advisory Center (VAAC) Washington warned about a volcanic ash plume that rose up to estimated 16000 ft (4900 m) altitude or flight level 160 .
The full report is as follows: FRQNT VA EM to 16000 ft (4900 m)
…25 Sep:
The Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH) reported that the eruption continued at Fuego between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). Explosions generated rumbling sounds. There were explosions reported, occurring at a rate of up to 10 per hour, with plumes rising to a maximum of 637 m (2,090 ft) above the vent. Fine ashfall was reported in San Pedro Yepocapa (9 km W), Sangre de Cristo (9 km W), Palo Verde (11 km W), El Porvenir, Quisache, and La Soledad. Explosions also produced shockwaves that shook the roofs and windows of houses in villages near the SW and W flanks.
Source: Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH)
… [read more]

Turrialba (Costa Rica): (25 Sep) The Observatorio Vulcanológico y Sismológico de Costa Rica – Universidad Nacional (OVSICORI-UNA) reported that unrest continued at Turrialba on 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Warning“ (on a 0–4 level scale).
Source: Observatorio Vulcanológico y Sismológico de Costa Rica – Universidad Nacional (OVSICORI-UNA)
… [read more]

Rincón de la Vieja (Costa Rica): (25 Sep) The Observatorio Vulcanológico y Sismológico de Costa Rica – Universidad Nacional (OVSICORI-UNA) reported that unrest continued at Rincón de la Vieja on 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Warning“ (on a 0–4 level scale). The aviation alert level remained at „Yellow“ (level 2 on a 4-level scale).
Source: Observatorio Vulcanológico y Sismológico de Costa Rica – Universidad Nacional (OVSICORI-UNA)
… [read more]

Poas (Costa Rica): (25 Sep) The Observatorio Vulcanológico y Sismológico de Costa Rica – Universidad Nacional (OVSICORI-UNA) reported that the eruption continued at Poás on 24 September 2025 (local). The alert level remained at „Level 2 – Warning“ (on a 0–4 level scale). The aviation alert level remained at „Yellow“ (level 2 on a 4-level scale).
Source: Observatorio Vulcanológico y Sismológico de Costa Rica – Universidad Nacional (OVSICORI-UNA)
… [read more]

Nevado del Ruiz (Colombia): Volcanic Ash Advisory Center Washington (VAAC) issued the following report: VA EM DTCTD

Sangay (Ecuador): Explosive activity continues. Volcanic Ash Advisory Center (VAAC) Washington warned about a volcanic ash plume that rose up to estimated 20000 ft (6100 m) altitude or flight level 200 .
The full report is as follows: LGT VA EMS OBS to 20000 ft (6100 m)
…25 Sep:
The Instituto Geofísico-Escuela Politécnica Nacional (IG-EPN) reported that the eruption continued at Sangay between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). Ash and gas plume(s) rose to a maximum of 900 m (2,953 ft) above the vent. There were 134 seismically detected explosions reported. The alert level remained at „2 – Yellow“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Instituto Geofísico-Escuela Politécnica Nacional (IG-EPN)
… [read more]

Reventador (Ecuador): (25 Sep) The Instituto Geofísico-Escuela Politécnica Nacional (IG-EPN) reported that the eruption continued at Reventador between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). Ash and gas plume(s) rose to a maximum of 1,000 m (3,281 ft) above the vent. There were 98 seismically detected explosions reported. There were incandescent rockfalls, descending 1,100 m below the crater. The alert level remained at „3 – Orange“ (on a 4-level scale).
Source: Instituto Geofísico-Escuela Politécnica Nacional (IG-EPN)
… [read more]

Sabancaya (Peru): (25 Sep) The Centro Vulcanológico Nacional del Instituto Geofísico del Perú (CENVUL-IGP) reported that the eruption continued at Sabancaya between 23 September 2025 (local) and 24 September 2025 (local). Gas and vapor plume(s) rose to a maximum of 800 m (2,625 ft) above the vent. The alert level remained at „Orange“ (level 3 on a 4-level scale).
Source: Centro Vulcanológico Nacional del Instituto Geofísico del Perú (CENVUL-IGP)
… [read more]

Volcano Activity Summary for 26 Sep 2025:

The Trump administration’s call to ‘reframe’ the global asylum system would harm people seeking safety 

Background: In mid-September 2025, media reports suggested that US President Donald Trump’s administration planned to call for “reframing the global approach to asylum” during an event on the sidelines of the United National General Assembly High-level Week. On 25 September, the US hosted a side event at UNGA headlined by Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, titled The Global Refugee and Asylum System: What Went Wrong and How to Fix It. Speakers included representatives from Panama, Liberia, Bangladesh, and Kosovo.  

The administration called for a “reframing” of the global approach to asylum, based on five “principles”

  • Every nation has the “right” to control its borders. 
  • There is no right to immigrate or to receive asylum or refugee status in the country of an individual’s choice. 
  • Refugee status is temporary, not permanent. 
  • Sovereign states, not transnational bodies, make the determination whether the conditions in a country of origin permit return. 
  • Every country must agree to accept expeditiously the return of its nationals. 

The US is party to the 1967 Refugee Protocol, but not the 1951 Refugee Convention. Despite earlier reports, no indication was made in the event that the US would withdraw from the Protocol. However, consistent with an Executive Order issued by President Trump in February, the State Department is undergoing a review of all treaties to which the US is a party.  

Q1: What does Amnesty International think about the proposal? 

The most striking feature of the Trump administration’s proposal is the absence of any reference to the principle of non-refoulement, the cornerstone of the current global asylum system. Under this principle, states cannot return anyone to a place where they would be at real risk of serious human rights violations.  

The key substantive point of the proposal would be requiring asylum seekers to claim protection in the first country they enter. This would (1) severely curtail the ability of refugees, particularly of poor and racialised people from Global South countries, to seek protection; and (2) increase the chasm between Global North and Global South countries, as middle- and low-income countries in the Global South continue carrying most of the responsibility for the world’s refugees.  

First, the proposal would have a disproportionate impact on poor and racialised asylum seekers and refugees from Global South countries. The proposal would make it impossible for asylum seekers to seek protection in countries other than the first country they enter. For people travelling by land, that would mean not being able to seek protection in countries other than those neighbouring their own. That would not only restrict people’s ability to exercise the right to seek asylum; it would make the right to seek and receive international protection dependant on an individual’s country of origin and the vagaries of geography. The impact of the proposal would be more severe on asylum seekers and refugees coming from regions where refugee protection is weak, and those who do not have the means to travel by air.  

Second, the proposal would serve the interests of Global North countries, to the detriment of Global South countries that already host most of the world’s refugees [see below Q4]. 

The US has both the international and domestic tools to address the concerns it has raised, without undermining or overturning the multilateral agreements or weakening protections for refugees. 

Q2: Why should asylum seekers be allowed to pick and choose the country they want to go to? 

The US administration’s claim that asylum seekers pick and choose the country where they claim asylum is not supported by evidence. In fact, most refugees and asylum-seekers worldwide stay in the first country they enter. According to UNHCR, 67% live in countries neighbouring their countries of origin; and 73% are hosted in low- and middle-income countries. 

However, often protection cannot be found in a neighbouring country and asylum seekers and refugees need to keep moving to find safety.  

Authorities in Iran, the country hosting the largest number of refugees (3.5 million), are waging an unlawful expulsion campaign targeting Afghan refugees, forcibly returning more than one million people to Afghanistan in 2025. Authorities in Pakistan have forcibly returned more than one million Afghan refugees and asylum seekers since announcing a “repatriation plan” in October 2023.  

In several African countries, legislation criminalising homosexuality and increasingly repressive practices have had a negative impact on LGBTI refugee communities. In Kenya, Amnesty International and the National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (NGLHRC) have documented hate crimes, violence, and other serious human rights abuses targeting LGBTI asylum seekers and refugees living in one of Kenya’s biggest refugee camps. 

Amnesty International has also documented abuses against asylum seekers, refugees and migrants in Mexico.  

US law already prohibits the granting of asylum or refugee status to anyone who was firmly resettled elsewhere meaning that those who successfully were able to seek safety elsewhere would already been disqualified under US law.  

Q3: Why should refugees be allowed to stay in their country of asylum indefinitely? 

Asylum is not indefinite or permanent per se. The length of time the protection exists is predicated on the conditions in the country of origin. Under the 1951 Refugee Convention, refugee status only continues as long as the person continues meeting the relevant criteria, and “cessation” procedures may be initiated if circumstances in the country of origin have changed significantly and durably.  

Many asylum systems include procedures for the host country to regularly check whether conditions in the country of origin have changed. In the European Union, for example, the Qualification Directive ((Directive 2011/95/EU) allows Member States to review refugee status periodically or when new evidence arises.  

In the United States, refugee status itself is not subject to periodic renewal. Thousands of refugees have become naturalized citizens and have contributed greatly to the country. A recent study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found that from 2005 to 2019, resettled refugees and people granted asylum in the U.S. contributed billions more in federal, state, and local government revenues than they received in services.  

Q4: Would the proposal mark a radical shift from how the global refugee system currently works?  

The Trump administration’s proposal reflects and reinforces a decade-long trend among Global North countries refusing their fair share of the responsibility for the world’s refugees and shifting that responsibility on low- and middle- income Global South countries. 

Australia’s offshore detention centres in Nauru and Papua New Guinea, the EU’s cooperation agreements with Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, and others, the UK’s failed deal with Rwanda, measures to unlawfully suspend access to asylum coupled with pushbacks of refugees and asylum-seekers at the borders of Greece, Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia, have all intended to deter and confront spontaneous arrivals of racialised refugees and asylum seekers from Global South countries.  

Proposals currently being negotiated to review the EU’s return or deportation legislation as well as the ‘safe third country’ concept in EU law, likewise, would make it possible for EU countries to reject individuals’ asylum claims as inadmissible and transfer them, against their will, to countries to which they have no connection and in which they may have never set foot. 

In the US, policies including “metering”, the Migrant Protection Protocols (“Remain in Mexico”), the Title 42 Public Health Order, the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Final Rule (the “Asylum Ban”), the June 2024 Presidential Proclamation and mandatory use of the CBP One mobile application have severely limited access to asylum at the US-Mexico border over the past decade. On 20 January 2025, President Trump declared a national emergency at the US-Mexico border and suspended the entry of non-citizens and people without valid visas, meaning there is currently no way for individuals at the border to seek asylum in the US.  

As they increasingly refuse to welcome refugees and asylum-seekers on their territories, Global North countries are also increasingly refusing to share the financial responsibilities for their protection and assistance in other countries where the vast majority of refugees are hosted, cutting their humanitarian aid budgets and leaving humanitarian appeals underfunded. 

The US’ proposal is a further shift away from the commitments to share responsibility across states in response to forced displacement included in the Global Compact on Refugees, a framework for more predictable and equitable responsibility-sharing adopted by the UNGA in December 2018. 

The Trump administration’s proposal does not stem from an evidence-based analysis of the current global asylum system. It reflects the administration’s domestic political agenda, its biases about the US domestic asylum system, and populist-fuelled fears about a conspiracy to diminish the influence of White people in the country, while perpetuating false and harmful narratives about asylum seekers.  

Q5: But surely countries have the power to control their borders? 

The power of countries to control their borders is not absolute – it is limited by their human rights obligations. Notably, countries are under the obligation not to transfer anyone to a place where they would be at real risk of serious human rights violations (the principle of non-refoulement). Individuals have the right to seek asylum; their asylum claims must be determined in fair and effective asylum determination processes.  

Q6: What are the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol? 

The 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol define the term “refugee” and outline the international obligations for their protection. The 1951 Refugee Convention (Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted in Geneva on 28 July 1951) currently has 146 states parties. Its 1967 Protocol (Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted by the UN General Assembly with Resolution 2198 (XXI)) currently has 147 states parties

Reflecting the historic context of WWII, the scope of the 1951 Refugee Convention was originally limited to events occurring before 1 January 1951. States parties had the option to apply its provisions either universally or only to refugees from Europe, but most decided to apply it only to refugees from Europe. The 1967 Protocol expanded the scope of the 1951 Refugee Convention by removing both its temporal and geographic limitations. Most states parties currently apply the 1951 Refugee Convention to people fleeing persecution globally and at any time. Only four countries currently apply the 1951 Refugee Convention with the geographical limitation to Europe (Turkey, Monaco, Madagascar and Congo (Brazzaville)). 

The US proposal does not specifically state that the existing treaties should be abandoned. However, regardless of a country’s ratification status to these two treaties, states are bound by the obligation of non-refoulement, which prohibits them from transferring individuals to a place where they would be at real risk of persecution or other serious human rights violations. The obligation of non-refoulement is a rule of customary international law and is therefore universal, binding all states irrespective of their ratification of specific treaties. Its procedural aspects require states to allow individuals to challenge any decision to transfer them on non-refoulement grounds. Any procedure to challenge transfers should afford all procedural guarantees of fairness, including suspensive effect.  

The post The Trump administration’s call to ‘reframe’ the global asylum system would harm people seeking safety  appeared first on Amnesty International.

Israel/IOPT: Microsoft’s move to block Israeli military unit’s access to its mass surveillance technology is a moment for corporate reckoning  

Responding to Microsoft’s decision to restrict an Israeli military unit’s access to its technology after an investigation found it was being used to store mass surveillance data on Palestinians, Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International said: 

“Amnesty International welcomes reports of Microsoft’s decision to terminate Israel’s Unit 8200’s access to certain Azure Cloud storage and AI services, however it is crucial that Microsoft investigate all its contracts, sales and transfers of surveillance, artificial intelligence and related equipment to Israel and ensure that they are not being used in connection with Israel’s human rights violations against Palestinians.   

“Microsoft’s move sends a strong signal to all companies, including other Big Tech monoliths, that they too must confront their participation in the global political economy sustaining Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, apartheid against all Palestinians whose rights Israel controls, and its unlawful occupation of the Palestinian territory.  

Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International

“Companies, including other major providers of cloud services, must also suspend all sales and deliveries into Israel of weapons and other military, security and surveillance equipment, or other heavy machinery, parts or goods and services contributing or directly linked to Israel’s international crimes against Palestinians. 

“The tide must turn towards accountability. As Israel’s unprecedented campaign of killing, destruction, starvation and forced displacement continues against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, there must be an end to the impunity that Israel has enjoyed and flouted. States must turn their words into action and live up to their legal obligations toward bringing Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to an end. They can no longer claim they didn’t know. 

“A growing number of international human rights bodies and experts, including Amnesty International and more recently, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, have concluded: that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. The International Court of Justice in January 2024 already raised the alarm on the risk of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and repeatedly asked Israel to stop its illegal conduct. Orders that have remained cruelly unheeded.  

“It is also imperative that states exert pressure on Israel to comply with the UN General Assembly resolution on 18 September 2024, demanding that Israel end its unlawful occupation of the Palestinian territory within 12 months of that date as a result of the July 2024 International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion that found Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory unlawful. The UNGA also called on member states “[n]ot to render aid or assistance to illegal settlement activities, including not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connection with settlements” in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. These words must be rapidly translated into meaningful measures.” 

Background 

Microsoft has reportedly ended the use of some of its Azure Cloud storage technology by the Israeli military Unit 8200 in mass surveillance of Palestinians following a joint investigation by the Guardian, Israeli-Palestinian publication +972 Magazine and the Hebrew-language media outlet Local Call. Microsoft’s own statement confirmed that they supply other products to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, including for security and military purposes. 

The investigation exposed how Unit 8200, Israel’s elite military intelligence unit, used Azure Cloud to run a surveillance system that collected, stored, replayed and analyzed millions of civilian phone calls from Gaza and the West Bank, targeting the Palestinian population. 

On 18 September 2025, Amnesty International published a briefing calling on states, international, municipal and other public institutions and companies, and other private actors, to apply increased pressure on Israel to abide by its international obligations and put an end to the genocide of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, the unlawful military occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel’s system of apartheid against all Palestinians whose rights it controls. The report names 15 companies that Amnesty International has identified as contributing to Israel’s unlawful actions. 

The post Israel/IOPT: Microsoft’s move to block Israeli military unit’s access to its mass surveillance technology is a moment for corporate reckoning   appeared first on Amnesty International.