After the catastrophic experiences of World War II, the Human Rights Declaration of 1948 defined the right to seek asylum as a fundamental human right. However, not all countries comply with the requirements of international refugee law. While some open their borders and grant protection, others keep their borders completely closed, and yet others admit some groups of refugees while excluding others. How can we make sense of these different responses to admitting refugees? Framing Refugees analyzes political discourse on the admission of refugees in six countries from different regions of the world: Germany, Poland, and Turkey, all responding to the exodus of Syrian and Middle Eastern refugees; Chile’s reaction to the Venezuelan displacement; Singapore and its stance toward Rohingya refugees; and Uganda facing the displacement from South Sudan. The book takes a cultural sociological perspective, emphasizing the importance of framing and the cultural repertories that frames are based on. It shows that refugee policies are shaped by how governments and opposition parties respond to two questions: Who are “we,” the receiving nation? And who are “they,” the refugees? In framing the “we” and the “others,” politicians draw on cultural repertoires, which vary by country and political constituency within a country. Contrary to accounts that emphasize a cross-national convergence toward either a more liberal or a more “securitized” discourse on refugees, Framing Refugees uncovers the country-specific cultural repertoires such as a neo-Ottoman ideology in Turkey, Pan-Africanism in Uganda, or Poland’s self-understanding as a Christian nation. This approach also helps to understand why sometimes illiberal regimes such as Turkey and Uganda pursue a more open refugee policy than liberal ones.