Let's not go overboard. Claiming the number of bugs is zero in any non-trivial piece of software is generally a losing proposition, no matter the language.

That said, I think I know what you're trying to express, and I would say it like this: The number of bugs in a program written in Rust compared to C or C++ should be statistically less, all other things being equal. Certain classes of bugs are impossible with Rust at best, and easier to locate or isolate at worst (assuming you haven't wrapped the entire program in one giant unsafe block).