Sadiq Khan and Zohran Mamdani: Shared Faith, Different Politics — What New York’s Mayor-elect Can Learn from London

LONDON — Sadiq Khan, the left-leaning Muslim mayor of Britain’s largest city, and Zohran Mamdani, New York’s newly elected mayor, share much in common — including their faith and the experience of being targeted by Islamophobic attacks — yet they represent different strains of progressive politics and face distinct governing environments.

Welcome and reaction

Khan, who has led London since 2016, publicly welcomed Mamdani’s victory, saying New Yorkers had “chosen hope over fear, unity over division.” The 34-year-old Mamdani defeated Republican Curtis Sliwa and other rivals in Tuesday’s mayoral contest.

Shared experience of abuse and faith-based attacks

Both men have been the targets of abuse and threats tied to their Muslim faith. Khan routinely receives vitriol from conservative and far-right commentators, and former U.S. President Donald Trump has frequently attacked him with personal insults, at times accusing him of wanting to bring Sharia law to London — a false claim Khan has forcefully rejected.

Mamdani likewise endured a campaign in which opponents trafficked in misleading or extreme claims; at one point a radio personality’s remark about Mamdani and 9/11 drew criticism, and some critics falsely labelled him a “jihadist” or a supporter of Hamas. Mamdani vowed during the campaign that he would not change his religious practices: “not change who I am, how I eat, or the faith that I’m proud to call my own.”

Political styles and backgrounds

Despite their shared faith and the abuse they receive, the two are politically distinct. Mamdani is an outsider on the left — a democratic socialist whose digitally savvy campaign energized young voters and helped produce a high turnout. Khan, 55, is more of an establishment centre-left politician within Britain’s Labour Party who rose through law, human-rights work and a decade in Parliament before becoming London’s first Muslim mayor.

Their family backgrounds differ: Khan is the son of Pakistani immigrants who grew up in a crowded public housing flat in south London, while Mamdani is the son of academic Mahmood Mamdani and filmmaker Mira Nair, born in Uganda and raised from age seven in New York. Mamdani worked as an adviser for tenants facing eviction before his election to the New York State Assembly in 2020.

Shared big-city challenges

Both will govern enormous, diverse cities of more than 8 million people where voters worry about crime, housing affordability, and the rising cost of living. Mayors are often held responsible for problems that lie partly outside city hall’s control — a dynamic Khan has experienced across three election victories and one that Mamdani will confront as he attempts to implement ambitious pledges such as freezing rents, expanding childcare, and creating more affordable housing.

Power and governing lessons

There are important differences in the scope of their powers. The mayor of London controls transport and has influence over policing, but many responsibilities — schools, social services and local housing — lie with the city’s 32 boroughs. New York’s mayor has stronger executive authority in some areas, but still faces checks from citywide institutions and state government.

Experts caution that Mamdani should pick “a limited number of fights that you can win” and be realistic about the limits of mayoral power. As Darren Reid of Coventry University put it, “Winning an election is one thing, delivering on promises is another.”

Policy priorities and political risks

Khan has pursued environmental measures such as expanding London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone to reduce pollution — a policy that provoked protests but that research suggests improved air quality. The measure became a focal point for critics but also helped define Khan’s agenda on public health and climate.

Mamdani’s early choices will be watched for whether he narrows his focus to achievable goals or attempts a broader, more ambitious agenda that could provoke intense political pushback at the city, state and national levels.

“London is liberal, progressive, multicultural, but also successful — as indeed is New York,” Khan said. “If you’re a nativist, populist politician, we are the antithesis of all you stand for.”

Both leaders face the paradox of presiding over dynamic, prosperous cities that are often portrayed in exaggerated terms — simultaneously criticized as unsafe or chaotic and envied for their economic and cultural success. That tension helps explain why mayors of global cities remain lightning rods for national debate.