Neither.

Air defense is not required against a non-existant enemy.

sl should go NZ route.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]238212[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]238211[/ATTACH]

More here –
http://tarmak007.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/ins-vikrant-undocked.html

[ATTACH=CONFIG]238015[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]238016[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]238017[/ATTACH]

more pic / info:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1845328#p1845328

Well, they have similar numerical variety of aircraft (PAF + PA) compare to IAF + IA. Both at 23 types.

IAF + IA: 23 types –

[MiG-21, MiG-27, MiG-29, Jaguar, Mirage 2000, Su-30MKI, Tejas] | [Hawk, Kiran, PC-7] | [C-17, C-130J, HS-748, Il-76/Il-78/A-50I, An-32, Do-228, ERJ-145] | [Mi-25/Mi-35, Mi-26, Mi-8/Mi-17, Dhruv/Rudra, Cheetah, Chetak]

PAF + PA: 23 types –

[JF-17, F-16, Mirage III/Mirage V, F-7] | [MFI-17, K-8, T-37] | [C-130, CN-235, Il-78, Saab 2000, Y-8, Falcon 20] | [Aloutte III, Lama, Mi-17, SA 330, Z-10, AH-1, IAR-330, Fennec/AS350, Bell 206, Bell 412]

For a country with a much smaller defense budged they surely would be facing logistical and training problems with such a large variety of aircraft. Given this their operational availability would also be hindered.

In Nepal

[ATTACH=CONFIG]237267[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]237268[/ATTACH]

2nd pic = mk.3 ?

Its unlikely China will ever get back its loan for sub purchase given a bankrupt Pakistan and its failed economy.

still though, its additional employment for chinese workers, so not a terrible loss.

FWIW:

In Defence of the Nation – MOD eBook

http://pib.nic.in/archieve/others/2015/mar/d2015031702.pdf