C++ has no notion of a borrow checker and I am not aware of static checkers for the language that provides a coverage close to that of the Rust compiler.
As I continue to see how very experienced C++ programmers make exploitable bugs that passes all reviews and that are compilation errors in Rust saying that Rust is C++ with a different syntax is very naive.
Not necessarily because I have many complaints about it, but because I consider it in essence very similar to C++17, with (not-too-)different syntax and a few different but important design decisions in the core language and standard library. Seeing it sold as a radical paradigm shift from C++ has always left me feeling that some people are in for disappointment down the line.