This contribution addresses two key issues in relation to the plight of those who are fleeing armed conflict: firstly and more briefly, the UK’s reluctance to participate in the UN’s resettlement scheme for Syrian refugees; and secondly the role of ‘credibility’ within the process of determining eligibility for international protection. The relationship between credibility and the 'benefit of the doubt' principle is explored, particularly in the light of the UK Upper Tribunal's determination in KS (benefit of the doubt) [2014] UKUT 552 (IAC). It is argued that a narrow understanding of credibility overlaps with one dimension of the benefit of the doubt, and sees it as confined to the admissibility of the applicant’s unsupported statements; statements which, by giving applicants the benefit of the doubt, should be allowed to enter into the balance towards satisfying the low standard of proof as long as they are ‘credible’ in the sense of not being demonstrably false.