This article purposes to evaluate the phenomenon of domination of combative jihadism and factors that have conditioned the domination. It also evaluates whether the dominant concept of jihād can be paralleled to the Western concept of “just war”. It can be argued that normatively Islam recognises two forms of jihād namely the greater jihād (self-purification and improvement) and the lesser jihād (combative war). Historically, the contemporary discourse of jihād has been dominated by its combative meaning, however. This domination has been conditioned by several factors, such as the growth of the ideology of radical Islamism, the Western hegemonic behaviour, globalisation and the absence of alternative narratives. This article finds that, furthermore, the dominant concept of jihād, in a legalistic view, is relatively similar to the Western concept of just war, although, in reality, it tends to be illegal or “breaking the law”. It discusses the normative and historical meanings of jihād, the factors that have been conditioning the domination of combative jihadism, and jihād and just war.