My rule of thumb with this is self-determination with an eye and working arm towards towards cooperation/diplomacy.
So, let’s say there’s two warring children. Doesn’t matter if they’re large groups of people who agree about something vs another group of people who agree about something but their agreements about the something result in differences when they come together.
So, I’ll simplify to two warring children in the same household.
It’s possible to have layers: “I won’t want to talk to so and so. I want freedom from them” one says.
Ok. There’s a missing aspect from that. Time. Duration.
So, “freedom-from for how long?” Forever would be unacceptable because it’s the same household (which is a metaphor for the planet) and forever is illogical anyway.
“For now”.
Ok. For now is acceptable. You can take “for now” and expand it to a few minutes / hours / days / weeks / months as needed.
Once you have some kind of estimated time-frame, you have an “afterwards” established where presumably there will no longer be full separation.
From that point, you work backwards, allowing for current-time separation with an eye towards eventually future, and assist in efforts to reach that goal of diplomacy, neither rushed (like bus integration in the early 70s) nor stalled (middle east peace talks).
So, that’s my take on it.
====
[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]