The part you quoted doesn't support your conclusion. Per your quoted paragraph, the benefit of "AI vibe coding" is a large, but transient (i.e temporary) increase in development velocity; while the drawback is a persistent increase in static analysis warnings and code complexity.
To me, this sounds like after the transient increase of velocity has died down, you're left with the same development velocity as you had when you started, but a significantly worse code base.
The implication seems to be that if quality assurance is prioritized, the negative impact would be eliminated.
This seems to assume the main cause is the accumulation of defects due to lack of static analysis and testing.
I think a more likely cause is, the code begins to rapidly grow beyond the maintainers' comprehension. I don't think there is a technical solution for that.