Yes it is a commentary paper, commenting on the bias in the SG report and citing a number of studies which (at the very least) call into question the addictive model of nicotine put forward in the SG report.That's a comminatry article, not an original research paper. It's the opinion of the two authors. That's it. And if they choose to only cite other studies that support their contention, well, that's pretty biased. When I see a meta analysis of every published article in the medical literature that demonstrates that the vast majority of studies published show no addictive qualities to nicotine I'll be thrilled to read how I must be crazy that if I vape 0 nic I get cravings.
It is not saying nicotine isn't addictive, nor am I. But that nicotine as the primary addictive constituent of smoking is highly questionable. Smoking certainly is addictive, and nicotine may well play a role in that addiction, and smoking may well lead to nicotine addiction (many cofactors may be involved in becoming addicted, and one may well be addicted to nicotine in isolation after becoming addicted to smoking).
Note that in medical studies using oral or patch nicotine as possible treatments of such things as ulcerative colitis or neural diseases like parkinson's or alzheimer's (see for example: Nicotine treatment for ulcerative colitis) there are not reports of entire cohorts of nicotine addicted people after 6 weeks of nicotine treatment (or any addiction problems reported for that matter).