Book Review: ‘’Who Gets Believed? When The Truth Isn’t Enough’’
by Maisie Meacock (Student at the University of Sheffield in the module POL244, Spring 2024)
This book review will engage with Dina Nayeri’s ‘’Who Gets Believed? When The Truth Isn’t Enough’’ (2023), which underpins believability as a crucial aspect of migration processes and the lived experiences of those undertaking such processes. Nayeri reflects on her personal experiences as a refugee throughout the book, offering a compelling portrayal of the desire to be believed as a refugee, grounded in her own unique lived experience. The book highlights the increasingly fragile migration discourse, specifically of refugees and asylum seekers, and the tendency of key actors such as states and immigration officers to question their integrity. This essay will argue that the book’s narrative is effective in demonstrating broader political debates surrounding concepts such as forced migration and the politics of borders. Nayeri expresses the dual tragedy experienced by ‘’refugees seeking asylum, and seeking the belief of others’’ (2023, p. 5), which is one of the core arguments made in her book and frames the basis of this review. The book follows the author’s previous work ‘’The Ungrateful Refugee’’ which broadly details the lived experiences of refugees and the subsequent gratitude they are expected to show to successfully integrate into the states they have migrated to (Nayeri, 2020). This is significant because it emphasises Nayeri’s dedication to advocating the complexities of immigrant life as both books convey the implications of perceiving refugees in definitive and often discriminatory categories.
Nayeri tells the story of “K”, a Sri Lankan refugee who is subjected to barbaric torture whilst attempting to seek asylum in the UK (Nayeri, 2023). The key concept of believability is understood to be something which hinders the journey of ‘’K’’ who is repeatedly refused asylum by the UK Home Office due to the perpetuated rationale that his claims of asylum were false. Nayeri’s methodological approach of examining lived experiences is convincing in her reference to ‘’K’’, specifically when noting that ‘’K’’ was accused of manufacturing ‘’evidence in support of a false asylum claim’’ (2023, p. 85) which conceptualises believability as fundamental to the experiences of asylum seekers. Following repeated abuse in prison, ‘’K’’ is told by the Home Office that his physical injuries were a ‘’self-infliction’’ of harm (Nayeri, 2023, p. 113) which reiterates the idea supported by Nayeri that being believed is inherently difficult for those seeking asylum. As shown by Banks (2012) this example of ‘’K’’ being disbelieved encourages an increasingly popular rhetoric that refugees are deviant and purposely deceptive in their attempts to seek asylum. The story of ‘’K’’ is a key strength of the book as it denotes the shockingly accusatory language often used by state actors and how this ultimately condemns many refugees and shuns the journey of asylum (Crawley, 2006). Through the portrayal of ‘’K’’ and his experiences, Nayeri (2023) demonstrates perceptions of refugees as a threat to states, which contribute to discussions surrounding how borders can be politically manipulated. The rejection of asylum from the UK Home Office was based on assumptions that ‘’K’’ was untruthful in his claims for asylum therefore eliminating his right to stay. Bank (2012) suggests that refugees are categorised as deviant which is a characteristic stressed by political actors to justify the restriction of border access as a tool to ensure the protection of society.
The primary purpose of the book is to encourage awareness and accountability of migration struggles and can be understood conceptually in relation to the physical restrictions in the processes of migration. This position can be applied to wider issues such as border politics and the ability of migrants to exist within and across borders.
Laine defines borders as ‘’products of social and political negotiation of space’’ which ‘’frame social and political actions’’ (2016, p.467). This definition is significant in highlighting the power imbalance between those in control of borders and those who wish to cross them, as alluded to in Nayeri’s experiences. The power imbalance exhibited at borders is perhaps considered reflective of wider power dynamics experienced by refugees and asylum seekers during their integration into new societies which may be reluctant to accept their arrival and identity.
Nayeri states that ‘’refugees don’t have the strength or the power to rise up and defy borders and gatekeepers” (2023, p. 109), which supports the notion that ‘’the possibility to conceive of human mobility ‘beyond territoriality’ ‘’ (Côté-Boucher, Infantino and Salter, 2014, p. 204) is extensively difficult. The existence of borders understood in terms of state territory which need ‘’negotiation’’ perpetuates the systemic inequalities between nations, coined as the ‘’mobility divide’’ by Mau et al (2015). This is significant to the purpose of the book in that the conception of borders as political subjects exaggerates the powerlessness of refugees compared to the state- controlled borders which restrict their movement (Drake and Gibson, 2017). A limitation of Nayeri’s book is arguably the over reliance on personal narratives and experiences it engages with because of the subjective understandings of migration struggles they offer, rather than understandings grounded in concrete implications of political border control. However, the issue of border politics could be recognised as a key contribution, rather than an alternative, to discussions of personal experiences as the rigidness of borders emphasises the need for the silenced voices of refugees to be heard to combat perceptions about their disbelieved status (Western, 2020, p.305).
Nayeri emphasises the theme of credibility as a key argument in her presentation of asylum seekers, and the requirement of them ‘’developing a reputation for honesty’’ (2023, p. 45). The issue of credibility as highlighted extensively in the book correlates with wider discussions of forced migration. The concept of ‘’forced migration’’ categorises refugees and asylum seekers through politicised labelling and indicates the nature of experiences those struggling to obtain the right to stay face (Zetter, 2007, p.172). As Zetter explains, ‘’the formation of the refugee label reflects causes and patterns of forced migration which are much more complex than in the past’’ underpinning through the concept of labelling, the challenges of gaining credibility for refugees (2007, p.172). The relevance of forced migration in Nayeri’s book is that it offers explanations for the discriminatory, and often harmful experiences of those labelled refugees. The concept highlights the notion of the ‘right to stay’ and the significance of what stipulates a credible refugee or asylum seeker. Nayeri references her experience at a refugee camp and regards credibility as a necessity of securing her future migration (2023). She recalls ‘’tailoring our stories for asylum officers, knowing that our lives depended on what that officer found credible’’ (Nayeri, 2023, p.45). Whilst she makes the assertion that asylum should be granted as a form of protection, Nayeri argues that this is rarely the case because the believability and credibility of asylum seekers is continually challenged by political actors. The principle that refugees and asylum seekers are demanded to exhibit qualities greater than the average citizen and show gratitude regardless of the conditions of their experience is stressed by Nayeri in this book and ‘’The Ungrateful Refugee’’ (2020).
The language used by Nayeri emphasises the idea that acceptance of asylum seekers as legitimate individuals is extremely contested and difficult to achieve (2023). This is a fundamental strength of the book because it reinforces the essential argument that refugees seek both asylum and belief simultaneously (Nayeri, 2023, p.5). The principles of forced migration identify the obstacles encountered by refugees in consequence to the attribution of harsh stereotypes which frame their constructed status as being ‘‘deviant’’ and unworthy (Banks, 2012, p. 293). For example, the experiences of ‘’K’’ show that despite his endurance of continual abuse, he remained ineligible for asylum for many years based on perceptions that he was untrustworthy and therefore illegitimate as a prospective asylum seeker (Nayeri, 2023). The pertinence of maintaining worthiness and credibility as a refugee, exaggerated by Nayeri (2023), is supported by Badenhoop’s presentation of a ‘’super citizen’’ which ‘’characterise naturalised citizens as a political, economic, and cultural asset to the nation-state’’ (2023, p.89). This approach can be applied to asylum seekers, as key actors in the book, because it reiterates the position that refugees must go beyond what is expected of a national born citizen to prove themselves as believable and valuable individuals. Whilst the individuals presented in the book are seeking asylum rather than citizenship, the same principles of worthiness and credibility are applicable.
In conclusion, this review has identified and analysed the key arguments made by Nayeri (2023) and their relevance to broader discussions of migration. The successful use of personal narratives and experiences in the book have been highlighted in this review as fundamental to improving the understandings of the politics of borders and forced migration. This effective representation of previously silenced voices in the study of migration emphasises believability as a crucial aspect of the lives of refugees and asylum seekers. Nayeri offers a compelling exploration of the realities of life as a refugee and powerfully vocalises the importance of ‘’how to be believed’’ and ‘’how to be the ones people want to believe’’ (2023, p.45).
References
Badenhoop, E., 2023. Rationalities of Naturalisation: Citizenship as Award or Entitlement. In Calling for the Super Citizen: Naturalisation Procedures in the United Kingdom and Germany (pp. 65-101). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Banks, J., 2012. Unmasking deviance: The visual construction of asylum seekers and refugees in English national newspapers. Critical Criminology, 20, pp.293-310.
Côté-Boucher, K., Infantino, F. and Salter, M.B., 2014. Border security as practice: An agenda for research. Security dialogue, 45(3), pp.195-208.
Crawley, H., 2006. Forced migration and the politics of asylum: The missing pieces of the international migration puzzle?. International Migration, 44(1), pp.21-26.
Drake, B.S. and Gibson, E., 2017. Vanishing Protection: Access to Asylum at the Border. CUNY L. Rev., 21, p.91.
Laine, J.P., 2016. The multiscalar production of borders. Geopolitics, 21(3), pp.465-482.
Mau, S., Gülzau, F., Laube, L. and Zaun, N., 2015. The global mobility divide: How visa policies have evolved over time. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(8), pp.1192-1213.
Nayeri, D., 2020. The Ungrateful Refugee: What Immigrants Never Tell You: Catapult.
Nayeri, D., 2023. Who Gets Believed? When the Truth Isn't Enough: Vintage.
Western, T., 2020. Listening with displacement: Sound, citizenship, and disruptive representations of migration. Migration and Society, 3(1), pp.294-309.
Zetter, R., 2007. More labels, fewer refugees: Remaking the refugee label in an era of globalization. Journal of refugee studies, 20(2), pp.172-192.
You can contact the author by email: mmeacock1@sheffield.ac.uk