China's economic freedom may have been just 54 out of 100 in 2009, which is meaningfully lower than the 84 score of the U.S.; however, before Deng's reforms in 1978, China's economic freedom was close to zero. Subsequently, China's economic freedom has improved at an average of 1.5 points each year over the past three decades. No nation has improved its level of economic freedom as much or as swiftly. As a result, China's economic growth rate has averaged around 10 percent each year since 1980. Evidently, GDP growth is a function of a country's rate of change in freedom, as opposed to its absolute level. China has enhanced its growth potential by enhancing economic freedom. According to Kane (2007:3), "the lesson is that more freedom leads to more growth, but stagnant freedom (even if high) leads to stagnant growth."

China's public policy has become increasingly free-market orientated over the course of the last 30 years. Marketization has, quite undeniably, been a vital ingredient in China's own development strides in poverty alleviation and economic growth since 1978. More explicitly, China's exceptional economic growth is, in part, a result of a combination of trade liberalization; the liberalization of inward foreign direct investment (FDI); the use of a competitive exchange rate; its vast savings and a current account surplus; and political stability. These are cornerstones of the Washington Consensus.

Granted, the Chinese state plays a far greater role in China's affairs than do the states in many advanced economies. However, deregulation, privatization of state-owned enterprise, the incorporation of capitalist ideals and the extension of property rights have advanced dramatically. In fact, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, which indexes the level of entrepreneurial activity across countries, scores China at 16.2, far ahead of peer-emerging markets Brazil (11.7), Malaysia (11.2), South Africa (5.2) and Thailand (15.2) (Pottinger, 2008).

China's experience suggests that, at this juncture, economic reforms that enable the private sector to flourish in Africa, underscored by competitive market forces, will go a long way in growing African economies. Recent developments confirm that Africa's improved economic performance since 2000 has been underpinned by a number of internal structural improvements, including: responsible macroeconomic management; improved agricultural output and industrial management; relatively stable political frameworks; support in the form of aid; and debt relief. The many macroeconomic and microeconomic reforms Africa has undertaken over the past decade even enabled the continent to avoid falling into the recessionary spell of the mature economies during 2009. Moreover, Africa becomes more attractive for commercial partnership for all potential suitors as stronger, larger and more stable markets develop.

The notion of a contradiction between China's success and the Washington Consensus is, in large part, simplistic and misleading. Furthermore, the idea that African governments are predisposed to prefer strong state-involvement is an over-generalization. The New African (2008:14) reports that "the fact that China has come up with an economic and political development model that seems to have produced tangible results in terms of poverty alleviation and national control of assets makes the country more appealing to most African countries." In a similar vein, Kurlantzick (2006b:3) notes that China offers a development model to the developing world, in which the state controls development from the top. The tendency to view African policy choices through the prism of West and East has overplayed the ideological underpinnings of reform choices made by governments across the continent.

China is offering a different style of engagement rather than a different economic model to the Washington Consensus. China's bilateral, investment and trade with Africa should be seen as an enabler for African governments to further their own economies and develop their own brand of development ideology that builds on the current development discourse and empirical evidence.