Interesting. Your statements seemed quite superficial, but I seem to have misread you. I am sorry to have done so.
However. Which of the many things the Dalai Lama has said about Theravada are you referring to (and why should I care?). What I found he said, in 2012, is the following:
Source: https://www.dalailama.com/news/2012/reaching-the-same-goal-from-different-paths-thai-buddhists-in-dialogue-with-his-holiness-the-dalai-lama
Note: "the Pali tradition" = Pañca-sila. You still were simply wrong about the formal rules about alcohol in Theravada. There are actually no other rules for laypeople than the Pañca-sila, so overlooking one in only five seems... to demonstrate that your knowledge about Theravada is smaller than you would want us to believe.
Keeping with this subject, my assumption is, that we are talking about laypeople or non-buddhists passing through airports, so they should be able to follow their own volition and be able to choose not to keep the Pañca-sila at this day? And you might notice that I said, that I think it a valid discussion, if a government should have any power to decide about this very individual moral choice.
You indicated this opinion to be that outlandish, as if I came from another planet. I find that a surprising contrarian discussion stance... in somebody who wants to discuss, instead of forcing his opinion on somebody else.
That a large number of Thai people themselves do follow Theravada as in the Pali canon only superficially is, in my eyes, rather a weak argument. I would wish we could ease into a serious discussion based on Theravada and how it defines Sila (morality), instead of... changing the subject. Somebody with an abbot as friend should have a jolly good time doing so.
Therefore, intentionally, I keep this question open, as I am interested in opinions why this should or should not be. Feel free to do so.