The Munich Security Conference is one of the most important defense and foreign-policy meetings of the year. This year it was held February 12-14. Top leaders from around 70 different nations convened in Munich, Germany, to discuss the state of the world. Attendees included United States Secretary of State John Kerry, Sen. John McCain, Russian Prime Minister Dimitry Medvedev and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, along with several other prominent world leaders. Amid the discussions of world crises, one trend stood out dramatically: the disappearance of America from the world scene.

This isn’t the opinion of just one analyst; it was all over the reports from the weekend.

“Europe is facing a convergence of the worst crises since World War ii, and the overwhelming consensus among officials and experts here is that the U.S. no longer has the will or the ability to play an influential role in solving them,” Josh Rogin wrote for Bloomberg View in an article titled “Europe’s Convinced U.S. Won’t Solve Its Problems.”

“What was missing from the conference speeches and even the many private discussions in the hallways, compared to previous years, was the discussion of what Europe wanted or even expected the U.S. to do,” he continued.

“During the first day of the conference, the U.S. role in Europe was hardly mentioned in the public sessions,” he wrote. “In the private sessions, many participants told me that European governments are not only resigned to a lack of American assertiveness, they also are now reluctantly accepting a Russia that is more present than ever in European affairs, and not for the better.”

Matthew Bodner wrote for Defense News, “In the best of times, the annual Munich Security Conference serves as an altar upon which the transatlantic alliance can reaffirm its vows. When the chips are down, as they were this year, Munich exposes the deep fragility of Euro-Atlantic unity.” Later, he wrote that “Europe is no longer certain the U.S. will act as the ultimate guarantor of continental security. Meanwhile, Russia is seizing upon almost every opportunity to pursue its own objectives.”

Reuters also highlighted the diminished American presence. “At the Munich conference, longtime observers noted a diminished U.S. presence compared to past years,” wrote Lucian Kim.

Roderich Kiesewetter, a member of the German parliament and Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union, complained, “There’s not enough of the transatlantic.” He continued, “The Americans aren’t so present in the discussions. It’s a sign.”

The military blog War on the Rocks noted that “the call for greater American leadership was a constant during the conference.”

“Beyond the pleas for greater engagement, there was a consensus this year that America is not terribly relevant to the challenges posed by Russia, Syria and others. … [There is] a sense of great latent U.S. capacity but insufficient American will to commit resources in order to solve problems outside our borders,” it reported (emphasis added).

In stark contrast to the critical evaluation of America was Russia. Again, this was another development picked up by many analysts.

“In the absence of strong U.S. or European leadership, the Russian president is in the driver’s seat and loving it,” wrote Lucian Kim.

“Munich sent a clear message: 2016 will test the strength of the political, economic and cultural ties that have bound the transatlantic community since 1945,” concluded Defence News. “And Russia may have the momentum. It certainly has the clearer goals.”

“Russians brimmed with confidence and drew contrasts with a United States and Europe seemingly unable or unwilling to manage Middle Eastern crises,” wrote War on the Rocks.

On the face of it, this is absurd. America’s economy is five times larger than Russia’s. America spends seven times more on its military. In just about every quantifiable measure of national power, America beats Russia by a country mile.

Add to that the fact that Russia faces what’s so often referred to as “crippling sanctions” and is burning through its foreign-exchange reserves to keep its economy afloat. Yet when top leaders gather, Russia dominates while America disappears.

This paradox is powerful proof of the importance of a nation’s leadership and decision making. In his seminal book Politics Among Nations, Hans J. Morgenthau referred to this component of national power as “diplomacy.”

“Diplomacy, one might say, is the brains of national power, as national morale is its soul,” he wrote. “If its vision is blurred, its judgement defective, and its determination feeble, all the advantages of geographical location, of self-sufficiency in food, raw materials, and industrial production, of military preparedness, of size and quality of population will in the long run avail a nation little.”

“Of all the factors that make for the power of a nation, the most important, however unstable, is the quality of diplomacy,” he continued. “All the other factors that determine national power are, as it were, the raw material out of which the power of a nation is fashioned.”

Morgenthau describes Putin’s Russia exactly. “By using the power potentialities of a nation to best advantage, a competent diplomacy can increase the power of a nation beyond what one would expect it to be in view of all the other factors combined,” he wrote. “Often in history the Goliath without brains or soul has been smitten and slain by the David who had both. Diplomacy of high quality will bring the ends and means of foreign policy into harmony with the available resources of national power. It will tap the hidden sources of national strength and transform them fully and securely into political realities.”

This is what America sorely lacks. Fatalistic European leaders talked at the conference about how “the question of war and peace has returned to the Continent”—as Germany’s foreign minister put it. Meanwhile, John Kerry, America’s chief diplomat, brought sunshine and optimism instead of solutions.

Morgenthau’s description of a nation without quality diplomacy closely matches today’s America. “In the long run,” a nation “is likely to squander the natural assets by activating them incompletely, haltingly and wastefully for the nation’s international objectives,” he wrote.

To explain why America is lacking this leadership and quality of diplomacy, we must turn to the Bible. It prophesies that this nation’s strength would be “spent in vain” (Leviticus 26:20; Isaiah 49:4). God said He would take away great national leaders (Isaiah 3). “I will break the pride of your power,” He says (Leviticus 26:19). Those prophecies were on full display at the Munich Security Conference. For more on what the Bible says about America’s future, read our article “Heralding the End of an Empire.”