The collapse of two unions – the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia – has not only led to the need for a new world order to be formed and to the creation of more than two dozen UN member states, but also to the increase in the number of ethno-political conflicts by more than a dozen. Some of those that made attempts at secession have been joined to the metropolis through various tools, while the others maintained the status of a de facto state and are seeking to join the UN thereby becoming the states recognized by the international community and endowed with powers stemming from it. This process has been going on for nearly three decades, but for many this goal will not be achieved in the near future. Moreover, since the early 2000s, the intensified competition in forming a new world order has hardened the conflict resolution processes, since powerful countries try to use the conflict factor to influence the development of this competition. This not only impedes conflict resolution, but also complicates their study. Within studies of ethno-political conflicts and their resolution, it is especially important to assess the success of secessions, since this is directly linked to the purpose of that process. The assessment is often carried out through the method of comparative analysis. The article deals with both quantitative and qualitative models of such analysis. It demonstrates that although the problem is interdisciplinary, the legal component is sidelined in the analysis. To increase the effectiveness of such assessments, it is recommended to use a complex and interdisciplinary approach, conceptualizing the problem and its analysis, and taking into account all three components: legal, geopolitical, and ethno-cultural. In this case, the analysis will be carried out in two stages: a selection of comparable cases of secession, and an analysis of the necessary and sufficient variables.