That's not that easy. Yes C++ static checkers have improved, but the core guidelines will probably never provide the level of memory safety than Rust offers nowadays. There is a point where you can't make C++ safer without breaking the language. That's why Mozilla decided to create a new language despite its huge C++ code base and that Microsoft decide to favor Rust after experimenting with Checked C. They both have a huge base of C++ application with all the tooling possible, but still 70% of their critical vulnerabilities come from memory unsafety.

Some bugs in the unsafe regions may renders the whole application unsafe, that's true. That's still a huge improvement over "A lot of potential harmless looking statement anywhere in the program can renders the whole application unsafe". Indeed, the unsafe/safe boundary is not magic, but it is clearly delimited, and if the code inside the block is clean, then your program is memory safe.

Yes, It's probably not what you want your application to do, but crashing the application on situation you can't recover is memory safe. The goal of memory safety is that you can't corrupt memory and exploit it to make a arbitrary code execution or that kind of unsafe behavior.