This semantics issue with "hypersonics" is not for the naive masses who only contribute to the further obfuscation of "hypersonic weapons" with their poor takes and usual nationalistic chest thumping. That isn't to say China and the USA don't have their share of ignorant chest thumpers too. The difference is that China, US, Russia have actual capable MIC, high tech industrial and academic base. India simply does not. Not even remotely close to putting together the components to set up a capable academic, industrial and MIC ecosystem. They may have talented people, who could doubt. Certainly these talented people typically refrain from talking like jai hinds on the internet.
Let's try to focus on "hypersonic" as glide vehicles be they boost glide or air breathing gliders or just air breathing "quasi ballistic". Only China, the US, and Russia have gone through decades of development and testing to now have operational or near operational hypersonic gliders and/or engine propelled hypersonic weapons.
The 2000s MaRV like late variant DF-15 missiles greyed the zone between common understanding of wedge shaped gliders and fancy US experimental craft of which there were many - wedge gliders, air breathers, double conical gliders and so on. China seems to have pursued the seemingly low barrier of entry double conical hypersonic glider as MaRV to make missiles like the DF-15, DF-21, DF-26. Countries like Iran and North Korea have caught up in this field. North Korea even displayed a blended wedge shaped glider on a significant booster. The US seems to be struggling to get gliders into operation. Or even air breathing whether ramjet or scramjet powered HCMs. India runs all the same parallel programs in the hopes of attaining these superior performing missiles since they are better at evading air defences than conventional ballistic missiles if nothing more.
Russia's Tsirkon (aka zircon) intercepted by Ukraine and with missile parts from wreckage displayed offers a convincing claim that what they have intercepted (their claim because possibly could even be faulty or recovered missile) shows the Russian Tsirkon is similar to the Boeing Hy-fly which is also similar to a disclosed Chinese research project that was made public with no effort to hide the scramjet intake design. All three use a similar design intake and none "look" to me like they are gliders.
The "grail" of hypersonic weapon seems to be the air breathing glider as it combines both tech branches and presumably would increase its range. Right now China has at least two operational gliders; DF-17 and DF-27 (latter being made known by a US intelligence leak to the internet). China has test flown oblique detionation engines, rotating detonation engines and all manners of combined cycle engines on more programs than simply weapons. Scramjets are relatively speaking a bit more outdated than the propulsion methods listed. Certainly scramjets can't be used for high supersonic/hypersonic endoatmospheric aircraft of size or any single or two stage to orbit craft. India has only recently begun proper hypersonic wind tunnel programs. China has had them for decades and not only this but have the world's best performing ones (highest speed and time of pulse) by US acknowledgment.
China also reveals these strategic weapons very cautiously. Only after they have been in service presumably for some time. Whenever a new platform is officially disclosed, it is matured e.g. DF-17. India talks about stuff they plan on doing 10 years later and their internet warriors chest thump about them as if they've been the world leading platform for some time already e.g. Uttam AESA radar.
China has a lot more up its sleeves than shown. India has no sleeves and talks its mouth off. I'm referring to the observers, fan boys etc. US is somewhere in between, similar to their capabilities at the moment in this field. At the rate of progression, China seems to be leaving every other player in the dust... by US acknowledgment in politics and academics. You can find the quotes from Generals and mouthpieces online if you can be bothered.
The thing is China has a more conservative culture than the US when it comes to risking the unknown. Some can call this being less innovative, therefore risking being overtaken by the US. India has less funding, a lower starting base, a near non-existent high tech industry in this field of high secrecy and security. It's highly doubtful India will match the other players anytime soon. They may catch up to Iran and North Korea even but it's bicycle vs Nascar vs F1 with little to no chance of setbacks or crashes, just talking speed in this analogy.
Russia's Avangard is meant to be a glider. Who knows. It's quite secretive to the public but the tsirkon wasn't a wedge gliding airbreather. So.
