Translation:This is going to be settled here and now.
But your answer isn't literal. "Esto (This) se [reflexive pronoun pointing to a direct object other than the speaker, in context most probably Ustedes or Ellos/Ellas] va a (is going to) resolver (be resolved/be settled) aqui y ahora (here and now).
I tried and "This is going to be resolved here and now" is accepted.
I think the sentence could be either reflexive, and translated the way you have it "This is going to resolve itself here and now." or it could be in the passive voice and translated as DL wants it "This is going to be resloved (or settled) here and now." I am going to report the former as should be accepted to DL
'Se resolver' is the passive voice. (ugh, so many uses for SE.) In English the passive voice can be written 'to be settled.' We just form our passive voice differently in English.
I got it wrong because I thought the SE was reflexive. Sigh. I never can tell what that sneaky SE is for.
That sneaky "se" can have two meanings in a "ir + a + infinitive" construction like the one in this sentence. #1 Se va a Chile aprender español . (One goes to Chile to learn Spanish. It is a short cut way to avoid using the future tense when uses the neutral construction se. 1st person = Voy a comer al restaurante. I am going eat at the restaurant. #2 "se" appears when there is a reflexive infinitive in the "ir + a + reflexive verb" construction. Example La escuela se va a caer. The school is going to fall down. This is an alternative to the sentence La escuela va a caerse. In Spanish, you can put the reflexive pronouns in front of the first verb an "ir + a + refexive verb" construction. Me voy a caer. I am going to fall down VS. Voy a caerse. They mean the same thing.
DL may not accept that translation, but I think it is correct. I think they are looking for the "going to" construction, but "will" means the same thing. You added the reflexive pronoun "itself" which is optional in English. DL's computer almost always rejects them in sentences with reflexive verbs. In reality, of course, English speakers use them often.
There's a rule for using the conjunction "y", where if the sound of the second word in "this and that" starts with an "ee" sound, then substitute an "e" for the "y" so that there is a distinction in sounds and the "y" isn't lost (I'm assuming).
If this is the case, then why don't we likewise use "e" in place of "y" when the first word ends with an "ee" sound, as in this sentence? One cannot any more readily distinguish the "y" from the end of "aquí", as one could distinguish "y" from the "ee" in the start of, say, "hija". It is only logical to follow the same line of reasoning in both of these cases.
No Esto is a demonstrative pronoun, I could not find Ésto although it may be used in some places.
Este and esta are adjectives meaning this, and Éste and Ésta are pronouns meaning this one. esto is treated a little diferently since it is gender neutral. I suppose as an adjejective este and esta would know the gender of the noun it is taking since nouns are not neutral although they can be both genders. But pronouns can be gender neutral hence the use of esto. at least that is what I can gather from dictionary and reference books.