I consider it a hagiography of Venizelos. I would expect a more objective perspective, but it is clear that the ideological bias of the authors could not support it.

Another "hagiography" of Venizelos and his politics. No objectivity, even though the book claims to try to see the historical period, now that 100 years have passed, within a framework of objectivity and distancing from the propaganda of both sides. Unfortunately, it is exactly the opposite. The main and fundamental cause of the Asia Minor catastrophe was the National Schism and responsible for it was Venizelos (as he himself admitted in parliament later). I also suggest that the reader reads the following books for a more comprehensive depiction of the events and to have the opinion of both sides in mind of the historical period:
a. "The truth about Eleftherios Venizelos" by Panagiotis Liakos
b. "The two Betas" by Athena Kakouri.

Extremely useful, divided into neither small nor particularly large chapters.
An excellent stimulus for discussion.

Extremely enlightening (classes superior to the rather simplistic one of Veremi's "22 Questions and Answers about '22")