Yes . He means that one has to do politics for all the financial products the banks were doing before the crisis . Now he had to sell those businesses where there was risk involved and cut down the manpower so as to concentrate more on core sectors . Similarly he has to concentrate more on those countries where economy is growing with faster rate like developing countries instead of developed where growth is sluggish . Viability of banks must be maintained with customer satisfaction . These things come under financial politics to survive in the changed scenario.
Your vote on this answer has already been received
Weak CEOs like Pandit or Raju are likely to make such comments to justify the economic mess they create by their poor performance as CEO and surviving on the mercy of their political masters. These kind of CEOs survive by playing politics. Last year Pandit enacted a drama (like a politician) by accepting $1 as his salary claiming it to be his sacrifices to help Citi tide over its financial mess. This year he managed to get it raised to about $1.25 Million or so plus stock options and other benefits. Citi had to be twice bailed out by US government from the mess it landed due to bad management decisions. So no wonder CEO like Pundit instead on using economic to carry forward their organization are taking the easy way out of hobnobbing with the Political leaders for their survival. In a truly open economy it is the economy that drives the organization. It is the economic power that ultimately drives politics and not the other way around.