Pope Leo XIV hailed Turkiye as a bridge between cultures and religions, as he began his first foreign visit since becoming pontiff. He warned the future of humanity was at stake as a result of escalating conflicts. The Pope will also visit Lebanon during his tour.
Published On 27 Nov 202527 Nov 2025
Share
When e-commerce company Jumia wanted to go public in 2019, Africa’s most celebrated start-up didn’t list in Lagos, Nairobi, Kigali or Johannesburg. It went to New York instead. That tells you everything about Africa’s start-up problem: It’s not a money problem; it’s an exit problem.
African entrepreneurs can build world-class businesses, but investors hesitate because they cannot see how or when they will get their money back. Initial public offerings (IPOs) remain extremely rare, and most exits take the form of trade sales – often unpredictable and slow to clear. Our stock exchanges offer little comfort either with liquidity outside the largest firms still limited.
Start-ups here can remain “start-ups” for decades with no clear path to maturity.
By contrast, Silicon Valley hums along because everyone knows the playbook: build fast, scale up and within five to seven years either list on an exchange or get acquired. Investors know they will not be stuck forever. That certainty, not just the capital, drives the flow of billions.
If Africa wants its tech ecosystems to thrive, we need a parallel play alongside any new funds. Yes, let’s mobilise sovereign wealth, pensions, banks and guarantees. But equally, let’s change the rules of the game. Let’s build an exit clarity framework that gives investors confidence.
That means fast-track “growth IPO lanes” on our exchanges with lighter costs and simpler disclosures. It means standardised merger templates that guarantee regulatory reviews within clear time limits.
It means regulated secondary markets where early investors and employees can sell shares before an IPO.
It means modernising employee stock ownership rules so talent can build wealth too.
And it means creating anchor-exit facilities where big domestic players like South Africa’s Public Investments Corporation or IDC commit to buy into IPOs with risk-sharing from development partners.
The evidence shows why these matter. More than 80 percent of startup funding in Africa comes from abroad. African unicorns are overwhelmingly funded by foreign venture capital, with several having foreign co-founders or being incorporated outside the continent. This means exits and wealth creation largely flow offshore. When global shocks hit, whether interest rate hikes in Washington or political turmoil in Europe, our ventures shake.
On the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, small-cap boards make up only a sliver of daily trading activity, underscoring how limited liquidity is outside the blue chips.
In Kenya, the Growth Enterprise Market Segment, set up to serve fast-growing firms, has struggled to gain traction with only five companies currently listed as of 2024 – more than a decade after its 2013 launch.
To be sure, there are those who will argue that exits already exist: Trade sales are happening, holding periods in Africa are shorter than in many markets and capital is trickling in regardless.
That is true, but partial. Trade sales can be an option, but they are often unpredictable. Regulatory approvals take time, and deal terms are not always transparent enough for investors to build them confidently into their models.
This is not a system that inspires confidence from our own pension funds or sovereign wealth managers.
The response, then, is not to simply wait for more money to arrive but to fix the structures that govern its movement. If we could walk into investor meetings and say, “Here’s the pipeline of companies. Here’s the capital vehicle, and here is a clear five-year exit pathway,” we could shift the conversation entirely.
We could make African innovation not only attractive to foreign investors but also bankable for African ones. South Africa is uniquely positioned to lead this change. It has deep capital markets, capable regulators and institutional pools of capital looking for new growth opportunities.
The ask is not just to invest in start-ups but to invest in a new rulebook that makes exits real. If we succeed, we will have built more than another fund. We will have built a system that recycles African savings into African innovation, creating African wealth.
For too long, the debate has been framed around scarcity of money. But the truth is less about scarcity and more about certainty. Investors do not only chase returns. They chase predictable exits. Without exits, funds hesitate. With exits, funds multiply.
So, yes, let us mobilise capital and launch new funds. But let us also do the harder, braver thing: change the rules, not just the money. That is how we ensure our unicorns aren’t built on foreign capital alone. That is how we give our own savers and pensioners a stake in Africa’s growth.
And that is how we finally write a new playbook under which African innovation, African capital and African ownership all run on the same page because, in the end, the real lesson of Jumia is not that Africa cannot produce billion-dollar start-ups. It is that until we change the rules of exit, we risk exporting the wealth that should be owned and grown at home.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.
On Tuesday, voters in the largest city of the United States, New York, will choose a new mayor in a race that has stirred debate across the country and drawn global interest.
Zohran Mamdani, a 34-year-old state assembly democratic socialist who surprised many with his June win in the Democratic Party’s primary, is facing former Governor Andrew Cuomo, now running as an independent after losing the Democratic nomination. Republican Curtis Sliwa is among the other candidates in the race.
list of 2 itemsend of list
Here is what we know:
Voters on both coasts of the US will cast ballots in a series of elections: gubernatorial contests in New Jersey and Virginia, the New York City mayoral race, and a vote in California on a redistricting measure.
But of these electoral battles, it is the New York mayoral vote that has grabbed the most attention .
The three leading candidates are Zohran Mamdani, Andrew Cuomo, and Curtis Sliwa.
The Democratic nominee is running on a platform focused on affordability, calling for rent freezes, universal childcare, cheaper public transport, and a raise in the hourly minimum wage to $30. An immigrant, Muslim, and democratic socialist, his popularity has surged during the campaign, with nearly 370,000 early ballots already cast, and appealing strongly to young voters.
Mamdani, whose parents have Indian roots, was born in Uganda. If elected, he will be the city’s first Muslim mayor, the first to be born in Africa, and the first of South Asian descent.
Cuomo served as New York state’s governor from 2011 to 2021 and resigned after a state inquiry confirmed sexual harassment allegations by 13 women. He lost the Democratic primary to Mamdani (56 percent to 44 percent), but stayed in the race as an independent.
At 71, Sliwa has resisted pressure to withdraw from the race amid concerns he could split the anti-Mamdani vote. Known for his trademark red beret, he rose to prominence as the leader of the Guardian Angels, a volunteer crime-fighting group that became famous for its patrols of the New York subway system.
The latest RealClearPolitics average shows Democratic nominee Mamdani leading the mayoral race with 46.1 percent , giving him a 14.3-point edge over Cuomo (31.8 percent ) and a 29.8-point lead over Sliwa (16.3 percent ).
US President Donald Trump and businessman Elon Musk backed Cuomo late on Monday. Whether that high-profile, last-minute support will shift voter sentiment remains uncertain.
Polling stations across the city will open on November 4 at 6am local time (11:00 GMT) and voting will continue till 9pm (02:00 GMT on November 5).
Early voting took place from October 25 to November 2.
In New York, mayoral races are usually called quickly.
This time, however, with two candidates vying for the support of the city’s mostly Democratic voters, it may take longer to determine the outcome.
The 2021 mayoral race ended quickly – Democrat Eric Adams was declared the winner soon after the polls closed.
Being the US’s most diverse city, known around the world for its business and culture, makes picking a new mayor an especially important occasion.
New York’s election campaigns have mirrored the bigger national debates in the US, over identity, religion, political beliefs, and the country’s future.
Some of the key issues include:
Cost of living: The city is facing one of its tightest housing markets in decades. In 2023 the city had a vacancy rate of 1.41 percent , which means that only 14 out of every 1,000 housing units were unoccupied; 9.2 percent of all rental housing was described by city authorities as “overcrowded”. The number of new housing permits issued fell in 2024 compared with 2023.
This has made housing cost and availability a dominant issue. After a slate of California cities, New York is the costliest urban hub in the US to live in.
“Most of us are working multiple jobs, can’t make rent or rents are going up,” Tom Grabher, a city voter, told Al Jazeera.
Law and order: Serious crimes in the city, including murder, have gone down from their 17-year high in 2023. However, lower-level offences, such as shoplifting, remain higher than before the COVID-19 pandemic, adding to public worries about safety and disorder.
Migration: The city has long been a magnet for people from around the world, from its historic role as a gateway for immigrants to the recent influx of asylum seekers that critics say has placed new strains on the city’s resources.
Israel and Gaza: The ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict and the city’s large Jewish and Muslim populations have made foreign policy a key issue in this race.
A former New Yorker, Trump has loomed over the mayoral race for months, threatening to arrest Mamdani, deport him, and take control of the city if he wins.
On Monday, Trump urged the city’s voters on his Truth Social platform to back Cuomo, saying they had “no choice” but to vote for the former governor.
When the federal government shut down in October, Trump put on hold roughly $18bn in federal funds, although $187m from New York’s security funding has since been restored. Trump has threatened to withhold more federal aid for the city if Mamdani wins.
All eyes are on Virginia, a state next to Washington, DC, that has been directly affected by Trump’s spending cuts and the recent government shutdown.
Democrat Abigail Spanberger is facing off against Republican Lieutenant-Governor Winsome Earle-Sears.
In New Jersey, the governor’s race has centred on concerns about affordability. Although Democrats hold a voter advantage, Republicans are optimistic that Trump’s rising popularity in the state could lead to a surprise win. Democratic Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill is up against Republican Jack Ciattarelli , a former state assemblyman.
In California, a proposed ballot measure would redraw congressional districts in a way that could benefit Democrats in the 2026 midterm elections. Governor Gavin Newsom and state lawmakers say they introduced the plan in response to Trump’s earlier push for Texas to reshape its districts to give Republicans an advantage in five seats currently held by Democrats. If approved, the measure would effectively eliminate five Republican-held districts in California.
Starbucks has announced it will sell the majority stake in its Chinese business for $4bn to a Hong Kong-based private equity firm after years of losing market share to local competitors in China.
Starbucks announced the sale on Monday, which will see the firm Boyu Capital take a 60 percent stake in its Chinese retail operations through a joint venture.
list of 4 itemsend of list
Boyu Capital has offices in Shanghai, Beijing and Singapore, and its cofounders include Alvin Jiang, the grandson of former Chinese President Jiang Zemin, according to the Reuters news agency.
The US coffee giant will retain a 40 percent interest in its China operations while maintaining its ownership of the company’s brand and intellectual property, the company said.
The deal marks a “new chapter” in Starbucks’s 26-year-long history in China, the company said in a statement.
It will also give Starbucks a much-needed injection of funding and logistical support as it tries to expand its business deeper into China, according to Jason Yu, the Shanghai-based managing director of CTR Market Research.
Starbucks has 8,000 locations across China, but it aspires to open as many as 20,000 through its joint venture, the company said in a statement.
“Starbucks used to be a pioneer in coffee in China, where it was probably the first coffee chain in many cities, but this is no longer the case as the local competition already outpaced Starbucks in their expansion,” Yu told Al Jazeera.
Top competitors include homegrown Luckin Coffee, which has more than 26,000 locations worldwide, mostly in China.
Starbucks has historically been concentrated in first- and second-tier cities like Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen while Luckin has expanded into much smaller cities.
Luckin has also built a reputation around offering customers much cheaper drinks than Starbucks through its loyalty programme and in-app discounts.
A small Americano coffee at Starbucks costs 30 yuan ($4.21), but at Luckin, the same drink retails on average for about 10 yuan ($1.40), according to Yu.
Olivia Plotnick, founder of the Shanghai-based social marketing company Wai Social, told Al Jazeera that Starbucks has been unable to keep up with competitive pricing and consumer preferences.
“Between domestic players such as Luckin and later Cotti Coffee undercutting Starbucks on price, footprint and flavour fuelled by tech, wider beverage competition from the rise of milk tea brands and delivery platform wars, Starbucks have lost their once very competitive edge,” Plotnick said. By “delivery platform wars”, Plotnick referred to the cutthroat competition between apps for delivery services that drives down prices of goods like coffee.
Starbucks’s joint venture with Boyu Capital will offer the company more capital for investment but also help with logistics, infrastructure and managing commercial property as it opens more storefronts in regional cities, Yu said.
The company is following a familiar playbook used by other international brands in China, he said.
In 2016, after a major food safety scandal, KFC and Pizza Hut owner Yum Brands sold a stake in their China business to the China-based Primavera Capital and an affiliate of the e-commerce giant Alibaba Group, according to Reuters. The China business was later spun off into an independent entity.
In 2017, McDonald’s sold off a majority stake in its China, Hong Kong and Macau businesses to the Chinese state-backed conglomerate CITIC and the private equity group Carlyle Capital although it later bought back some of its business, according to CNBC.
After the deal with CITIC, McDonald’s doubled its outlets in China to 5,500 as of late 2023, CNBC said, and aims to open 10,000 restaurants by 2028.
If the ads are any indication, Proposition 50 offers Californians a stark choice: “Stick it to Trump” or “throw away the constitution” in a Democratic power grab.
And like so many things in 2025, Trump appears to be the galvanizing issue.
Even by the incendiary campaigns California is used to, Proposition 50 has been notable for its sharp attacks to cut through the dense, esoteric issue of congressional redistricting. It comes down to a basic fact: this is a Democratic-led measure to reconfigure California’s congressional districts to help their party win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2026 and stifle President Trump’s attempts to keep Republicans in power through similar means in other states.
Thus far, the anti-Trump message preached by Proposition 50 advocates, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other top Democrats, appears to be the most effective.
Supporters of the proposal have vastly outraised their rivals and Proposition 50, one of the most expensive ballot measure campaigns in state history, leads in the polls.
“Whenever you can take an issue and personalize it, you have the advantage. In this case, proponents of 50 can make it all about stopping Donald Trump,” said former legislative leader and state GOP Chair Jim Brulte.
Adding to the drama is the role of two political and cultural icons who have emerged as leaders of each side: former President Obama in favor and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger against, both arguing the very essence of democracy is at stake.
Schwarzenegger and the two main committees opposing Proposition 50 have focused on the ethical and moral imperative of preserving the independent redistricting commission. Californians in 2010 voted to create the panel to draw the state’s congressional district boundaries after every census in an effort to provide fair representation to all state residents.
That’s not a political ideal easily explained in a 30-section television ad, or an Instagram post.
Redistricting is a “complex issue,” Brulte said, but he noted that “the no side has the burden of trying to explain what the initiative really does and the yes side gets to use the crib notes [that] this is about stopping Trump — a much easier path.”
Partisans on both sides of the aisle agree.
“The yes side quickly leveraged anti-Trump messaging and has been closing with direct base appeals to lock in the lead,” said Jamie Fisfis, a political strategist who has worked on many GOP congressional campaigns in California. “The partisanship and high awareness behind the measure meant it was unlikely to sag under the weight of negative advertising like other initiatives often do. It’s been a turnout game.”
Obama, in ads that aired during the World Series and NFL games, warned that “Democracy is on the ballot Nov. 4” as he urged voters to support Proposition 50. Ads for the most well-funded committee opposing the proposition featured Schwarzenegger saying that opposing the ballot measure was critical to ensuring that citizens are not overrun by elected officials.
“The Constitution does not start with ‘We, the politicians.’ It starts with ‘We, the people,’” Schwarzenegger told USC students in mid-September — a speech excerpted in an anti-Proposition 50 ad. “Democracy — we’ve got to protect it, and we’ve got to go and fight for it.”
California’s Democratic-led Legislature voted in August to put the redistricting proposal that would likely boost their ranks in Congress on the November ballot. The measure, pushed by Newsom, was an effort to counter Trump’s efforts to increase the number of GOP members in the House from Texas and other GOP-led states.
The GOP holds a narrow edge in the House, and next year’s election will determine which party controls the body during Trump’s final two years in office — and whether he can further his agenda or is the focus of investigations and possible impeachment.
Noticeably absent for California’s Proposition 50 fight is the person who triggered it — Trump.
The proposition’s opponents’ decision not to highlight Trump is unsurprising given the president’s deep unpopularity among Californians. More than two-thirds of the state’s likely voters did not approve of his handling of the presidency in late October, according to a Public Policy Institute of California poll.
Trump did, however, urge California voter not to cast mail-in ballots or vote early, falsely arguing in a social media post that both voting methods were “dishonest.”
Some California GOP leaders feared that Trump’s pronouncement would suppress the Republican vote.
In recent days, the California Republican Party sent mailers to registered Republicans shaming them for not voting. “Your neighbors are watching,” the mailer says, featuring a picture of a woman peering through binoculars. “Don’t let your neighbors down. They’ll find out!”
Tuesday’s election will cost state taxpayers nearly $300 million. And it’s unclear if the result will make a difference in control of the House because of multiple redistricting efforts in other states.
But some Democrats are torn about the amount of money being spent on an effort that may not alter the partisan makeup of Congress.
Johanna Moska, who worked in the Obama administration, described Proposition 50 as “frustrating.”
“I just wish we were spending money to rectify the state’s problems, if we figured out a way the state could be affordable for people,” she said. “Gavin’s found what’s working for Gavin. And that’s resistance to Trump.”
Newsom’s efforts opposing Trump are viewed as a foundational argument if he runs for president in 2028, which he has acknowledged pondering.
Proposition 50 also became a platform for other politicians potentially eyeing a 2026 run for California governor, Sen. Alex Padilla and billionaires Rick Caruso and Tom Steyer.
The field is in flux, with no clear front-runner.
Padilla being thrown to the ground in Los Angeles as he tried to ask Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about the Trump administration’s immigration policies is prominently featured in television ads promoting Proposition 50. Steyer, a longtime Democratic donor who briefly ran for president in 2020, raised eyebrows by being the only speaker in his second television ad. Caruso, who unsuccessfully ran against Karen Bass in the 2022 Los Angeles mayoral race and is reportedly considering another political campaign, recently sent voters glossy mailers supporting Proposition 50.
Steyer committed $12 million to support Proposition 50. His initial ad, which shows a Trump impersonator growing increasingly irate as news reports showing the ballot measure passing, first aired during “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Steyer’s second ad fully focused on him, raising speculation about a potential gubernatorial run next year.
Ads opposing the proposition aired less frequently before disappearing from television altogether in recent days.
“The yes side had the advantage of casting the question for voters as a referendum on Trump,” said Rob Stutzman, a GOP strategist who worked for Schwarzenegger but is not involved with any of the Proposition 50 campaigns. “Asking people to rally to the polls to save a government commission — it’s not a rallying call.”