I am currently working on an essay that requires a nuanced understanding and analysis of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, specifically the choice between Option 1 and Option 2 of Article 7 for a hypothetical State X. This state is already a party to the New York Convention and is contemplating the adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law but is uncertain about which option under Article 7 would be more beneficial for its legal framework regarding arbitration agreements.

Given the complexity of this topic, especially in the context of international commercial arbitration, I seek your expert guidance to navigate through the analysis and to ensure a well-reasoned and comprehensive essay. I am particularly interested in the following areas:

Comparative Analysis: What are the significant differences between Option 1 and Option 2 of Article 7 in terms of legal implications for State X? How do these options affect the enforceability of arbitration agreements under the Model Law?

Case Law and Secondary Sources: Could you recommend key case law or secondary sources that might provide insights into how these options have been perceived or applied in other jurisdictions? This would help in grounding my analysis in real-world applications and interpretations.

Practical Implications: In your opinion, what are the practical implications of choosing Option 1 over Option 2, or vice versa, for parties engaging in international commercial arbitration under State X's jurisdiction? How might this choice influence State X's attractiveness as a seat of arbitration?

Structural Advice: How would you suggest structuring this essay to effectively compare and contrast these options, while also incorporating relevant case law and literature? I aim to present a clear and persuasive argument for State X's consideration.

Your insights on these points will be invaluable for crafting a coherent and persuasive essay. I am eager to delve into this analysis and provide a well-informed recommendation for State X.