Best, Ulrich , Transgression as a Rule: German-Polish Cross-border Cooperation, Border Discourse and EU Enlargement . Berlin : LIT Verlag , 2007 . ISBN 978-3-8258-0654-5 Ulrich Best's book deals with the transformation of the role that borders play in contemporary Europe and the challenge this transformation presents to the discipline of border studies. His study is focused on the case of the Polish–German border in recent years; however, the larger questions he asks in this context are of great relevance for the development not only of critical political geography, but also of critical social sciences in general. Although Best's work is based on material collected before Poland joined the Schengen Agreement in 2007, the moment when the Polish–German border disappeared entirely as a physical barrier for the movement of people and goods, it nevertheless anticipates a myth that has become dominant in recent years: namely, that of the enlarged European Union as a borderless, permeable space. This myth organizes the discourse of government agencies, mainstream media, EU institutions and, last but not least, most of the social sciences, including political geography and border studies literatures that deal with this part of Europe. In these narratives the notion of “border as a barrier” has been replaced by phrases such as the “space of flows”, “spirit of transgressions”, “interaction and cooperation”. Ulrich Best asks how, in such a context where cross-border cooperation has become mainstream politics, can border studies analyze and, in particular, offer critical insights? His argument is that a new structure of power has emerged: border transgression, which used to be a critical benchmark of state sovereignty, and has now been incorporated into its ruling structures. For example, power now operates through “cooperation projects” guided by formal rule-books that define “good practices” for every conceivable encounter with the “Other”. As Best suggests, practices of resistance to the former constellation—that used to be transgressive—have now been turned into practices of power in the new constellation. He argues therefore that practices of resistance have to change, and, while he doesn't offer any new vision of critical border studies, he presents a number of useful insights into the workings of the Polish-German interface, which can serve as guiding examples for the field's renewal. Best begins by analyzing commonplace discourses on both sides of the border. Looking in depth into the contemporary German discourse on Poland and Polish discourse on Germany, and their evolution in the 1990s, the author shows how a mutual “Other” is conceptualized, represented and narrated in these discourses. The first and most obvious conclusion is that German and Polish discourse on the mutual “Other” reveals a relationship of unequals. Poland is often depicted in Germany according to the classic orientalist schemes of backwardness, cultural inferiority and disorder. Many of these images are reproduced by the Poles themselves, who in turn have a one-sided view of Germany as a superior, more “civilized” neighbor. Best is able to trace these schemes not only in popular newspaper accounts but also in the idealistic slogans of free European cooperation, and the rhetoric of the actors involved in diverse cross-border initiatives and institutions. As he reveals, there is a dominant trend where the German side appears as the “senior” partner—as experienced, the one that teaches, shows, demonstrates. Poland, correspondingly, assumes the role of a backward entity, passive, expecting money, “on the way”. Best thus finds a new border emerging alongside the one formally disappearing between Germany and Poland: the border embodied by two ostensibly distinct people, Germans and Poles. He also notes the ironic emergence of a new orientalist discourse of exclusion and superiority within Poland, directed, in this case, towards its eastern neighbors. Thus, the reinforcement of Poland's eastern border as Schengen's eastern front after the extension of the zone in 2007 appears to have reconstituted the spatial gradient of “civilization” in this region. However, the orientalist view of the east in Poland is, at the same time, an element of a much wider and older mechanism; as I would argue, part of the pan-European center–periphery structures and, in this instance, Poland's efforts to compensate for its inferiority complex towards Germany, and the West in general. Had Best studied Polish discourse on its own in more detail, he might have been struck by the similarities between it and German tropes about Poland. The image of Poles as those unable to handle their German heritage find their counterpart in Polish images of the inhabitants of Belarus or Ukraine, in which the latter appear as somehow less skilled in dealing with their Polish heritage. I fully agree with Best's claim that Silesia is currently a key site of historical conflict between German and Polish nationalism. This is particularly acute in a period when both countries are in the process of national reconstruction: Poland in search of a “post-communist” or post-transformation identity and Germany still emerging from its long post-war period of repentance and reconciliation. Thus, the German–Polish confrontation can be seen today, in contrast to earlier periods, as largely deteritorialized and embedded in everyday practices of economic, political and cultural life, especially in such regions as Silesia. These tensions are particularly vivid in Best's analysis of the discourses of regional museums devoted to Silesia in Poland and Germany, illustrating sharply how the two states are now competing to shape the dominant image and identity of that region. Best also discusses the lack of self-reflexivity in border studies and other related fields. As he observes, the discipline in its current incarnation is largely constrained to look at instances of cooperation along the lines of “applied” border studies, thereby becoming part of the apparatus that puts rules into practice. He notes the growing influence of funding bodies, rules, and competitors, all of which make critical reflection very difficult. In effect, the field of border studies rarely scrutinizes its own location and role in border politics and the structuring of rules. Another important finding of the book is the emergence of the new image of Polish territory as a space of flows and as a country in a position of ambivalent inclusion and exclusion; a space that at once belongs to the European core and is located at its margins. This seems to be one of the most important challenges facing not only border studies but also critical social science, especially for scholars dealing with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Thus, on the one hand, we are witnessing growing spatial and social polarization, rising inequalities, hardening of ethno-nationalist sentiments, and accelerating impermeability of several borders, such as Poland's eastern frontier. On the other hand, the prevailing academic discourse—in a troubling disconnect with these realities—is of ambiguity, flows and transgressions. As Ulrich Best's case study of the German–Polish border testifies, contemporary social sciences has lost much of its ability to identify and criticize accumulating iniquities of various sorts. It seems we are a long way from developing a coherent new approach to the critical study of the emerging spaces and borders of post-communist countries; but the findings and, even more so, the questions posed by Ulrich Best in his book can help us to reach that goal.