The "new weapon" is described as being part of the Prompt Global Strike System - an effort to put non-nuclear warheads on ICBMs. A big reason why the PGS program might never be approved is that nuclear and non-nuclear ICBM launches appear the same to Russia, China, etc.
It's the ultimate cruise missile, but it's also easily mistaken for a nuclear launch.
I wouldn't be surprised if we have a Great Power inspection system, with a representative of every major power, whether nuclear or non-nuclear, at every declared PGS site. Any non-declared PGS ICBM launch would then be considered a nuclear attack.
Quite so. One would assume that a Prompt Global Strike launch would be announced to the major nuclear powers (UK, France, Russia, China, etc.). Said powers should be able to project the trajectory of the missile and determine it was not headed for their territory (or their allies'), precluding the need for a nuclear retaliatory strike. How this affects the potential utility of the system is left as an exercise for the reader.
The problem with that approach is that it requires open and working lines of communication. It only has to fail once, say at the mid-level of Chinese politics, and it could quickly go downhill!
If Prompt Global Strike was stored in orbit as described in the article, it would not look like an ICBM launch at all.
"[A]nother space launch by a Minotaur IV rocket . . . was carrying the prototype of a new weapon that can hit any target around the world in less than an hour."
You're confusing two different launches discussed in the article. The X37B can stay in orbit for weeks, but the PGS test was a Minotaur IV launch from Vandenberg.
It's the ultimate cruise missile, but it's also easily mistaken for a nuclear launch.