Pursuant to Art. 1(1) of the Charter of the United Nations, one of the purposes of the United Nations is the maintenance of international peace and security. It was within this objective that the United Nations created the concept of peacekeeping operations amid the Cold War. Following the adoption of Resolution 377(V) (1950) by the United Nations General Assembly, the United Nations Emergency Force in the Suez (UNEF I) was established as the first peacekeeping operation in 1956. The United Nations Security Council followed this precedent in 1960 with Resolution 143 (1960) and the establishment of the United Nations Operations in the Congo (ONUC). These initial operations have been followed by numerous others, one of which is the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). First established by United Nations Security Council Resolutions 425 and 426 (1978), the mission has been pursuing the objective of restoring international peace and security in the southern part of Lebanon for over four and a half decades, concurrently facilitating the re-establishment of effective Lebanese control over the region. Given the intensification of hostilities between the Israel Defense Forces and Hezbollah in Lebanon in late 2024, UNIFIL has once again been placed in a challenging position. Given these recent developments, the question arises whether the mandate of UNIFIL should be amended to a peacekeeping operation pursuant to Chapter VII of the UN Charter and further if it should be empowered to use force proactively, meaning offensive use of force – i.e., departing from the inherent defensive nature of peacekeeping operations. The essay argues that UNIFIL would be better placed to attain the objectives of its mandate by maintaining a neutral position in the region, thus refraining from an amendment of the mandate pursuant to Chapter VII of the UN Charter and the proactive application of force.