"Democratic Transition of Arab Countries and Stages of Transformation" was the topic of the third seminar of the academic year 2016/2017. The lecture looked into the question of democratic knowledge, its origin and structure, and the control of its generation and dissemination, which has become a central question in the debates on democratization around the world. The discussions were centered on the thesis of Tunisian researcher Dr. Larbi Sadiki, Professor of Political Science at the University of Qatar. His proposal focused on the state and prospects of Arab democracy, especially in light of the challenges posed by the Arab Spring to those working in the field of democratic transition. He raised radical questions about the nature and demands of democracy.The session was chaired by Dr. Haider Saeed, editor of Siyasat Arabiya, with responses from Dr. Al Ayachi Ansar, Professor of Political Sociology at Qatar University; and Dr. Imad Mansour, Professor of International Affairs at Qatar University.Sadiki began his lecture by stating his conviction that societies can only acquire meaningful democratic knowledge by starting from their own local knowledge base. He asserts it is wrong to look at Western knowledge as a single template, and a comprehensive model for democracy. Accepting this imposed model, which rejects thinking outside of its boundaries, and which is uncritically reproduced, is a mistake. Research on democratic transition in the Arab world has been affected by a framework of democracy that is full of recycled distortions.Sadiki added that it is important to start with a wide exploration process and to research within the existing gaps in the Arab community's knowledge reserves, the impact and importance of which were revealed by the Arab Spring. Local knowledge reserves reveal the amount of democratic knowledge, and this rich imaginary offers the possibility of building a fresh perspective on democratization. There is potential to embark on an alternative course to form a democratic knowledge that avoids illusions, sometimes in the name of political culture, sometimes in the name of teleology, and value-free actions that neglect the significance of belonging and identity. العربي صديقيSadiki believes that we should not be passive recipients and should question the authority of the Western model of democracy, and superseding Western theories of the conditions that incubate Democratization, while also paying attention to the question of the change of time and place. The discovery of democratic learning mechanisms and their adaptation to the civilian population is part of an open and complex process. This process happens far away from the limitations imposed by teleology and the meta-perspectives on the concept of the state. Research of the potential of societies and their capabilities during the Arab Spring highlighted inspiring skills and creativity for self-reproduction.The first response was presented by Dr Ansar, who argued two points: the question of choosing a particular path to democratization, and the question of the possibility of applying Western concepts to Arab cases. The two main understandings from which Sadiki set out. He criticized Sadiki's assumption that current democratic knowledge is Western knowledge and his consequent rush to reject Western concepts as an answer. Ansar argued that commonalities beyond Western modeling existed and this research thus ignored the intersection of people at different times and places, within the experience of democratization. He warned of Sadiki's argument presenting a zero-sum equation.The second response paper was presented by Imad Mansour, who dug into Sadiki's understanding of Arab societal features. He stressed the importance of understanding the features of Arab societies, avoiding ideological futility, and stressed that starting from an anthropological examination and knowing the narratives adopted by these societies, expressed through their existence, aspirations and identity. Our appreciation of the freedom and choice of societies, the study of our societies and their movements, even those that began before 2010, and beyond the Arab Spring, makes our approach to the question of society and the state an effective approach, and helps us to link the living bases within the state, Modernism and its heritage.Following the presentations, the audience joined the lively discussion.