Building peace and preventing the emergence of new and existing conflicts is one of the fundamental objectives of the United Nations, seen as deep down as in the charter of the organization. As the United Nations has existed for some time their peacebuilding framework has changed on several occasions, with the most recent change taking place in 2016. This paper is concerned with how this new United Nations approach to peace from 2016 has changed the way in which the United Nations understands peacebuilding. As this paper is focused on peacebuilding, this study applies the theoretical lenses of Liberal peace theory, critical peacebuilding and Scandinavian peace theory to critically examine the current United Nations approach as well as the previous approach to peacebuilding. The use of the ‘What’s the problem represented to be?’ approach allows for the identification of how the peace frameworks of the United Nations problematizes peacebuilding, the underlying assumptions as well as the effects. From this, it is determined that the new/current United Nations approach to peacebuilding has not significantly changed. Both frameworks are characterized by state-centricity with a focus on the necessity of liberal-democratic values being in place in order for sustainable peace to be achieved. The findings did show that the new approach emphasizes more interaction with local actors in the peace process however this emphasis was underpinned with a focus on peace through the state and not through the local.