Yes, i adhere to Ayn Rand's definitions. It is not so much that in naturalism the actors have little ambition; some may have great ambitions, or great expectations... But, as you note, they have little ability to bring that to fruition. Instead, they are pushed by events. Most of the "great" writing (in the sense of college Lit 101) is naturalistic. I found The Forever War to be in that vein, also.

And, yes, while Jane Austen may not be romantic in the Objectivist sense, she was a great writer. I read Pride and Prejudice and Northanger Abbey. (But I confess that I missed the implicit irony of a gothic about a girl caught up in gothic until I read a critical analysis by a college professor. Sorry: B+ in Art History; D in studio. In other words, I learn well, but am short on talent. That applies to literature, also.). We might argue that Austen was, indeed, Romantic, perhaps among the first. The characters have values, quite clearly, and their conflicts are based on those differences. And the resolutions come from intentional actions, not happenstance.

All of that is different from the resolution to The Forever War. That does not leave the novel irredeemable.